How secure is your code with confusion?

Using RedGate Reflector, you can easily get the complete source for the application. But to reduce the likelihood of detecting an algorithm, there are obfuscators to reduce this probability.

My questions:

  • How effective are obfuscators?
  • Which is safer from the point of view of hiding your algorithms: C ++ without .NET libraries or confusing .NET programs.
  • Is there another way to make .NET code even more secure?
+5
source share
5 answers

- , ++, .NET World de4dot (. https://github.com/0xd4d/de4dot), , , , .

, ++, (IDA: http://www.hex-rays.com/products/ida/index.shtml).

, , , , - . . : ( )

+4

" : ++ .net- .net obfuscated program". .net ofc...

Obfuscated.net.java . pro obuscats, , .

, -, ? is writen Assembly...

. , ( )

+2

.NET , . , MSIL . ++- , . ++ , Assembler (, , , ), .

, . . , , 70-80 .

, , , :

  • -

, . , . . , , . .

, , . DLL ( "" ), DLL.

, , . , , - . , , DoS .., , .

+2

- this. . , , .

0

?

ConfuserEx name, constants .NET-.

  • unicode Name protection //etc .
  • constants protection , , , , .
  • control flow .

# ConfuserEx'ed:

enter image description here

: ++ .NET- .NET.

.NET , .

.NET x86/x64, IMO, . x86- C , IDA-Pro. , x86 .

.NET- ?

Microsoft.NET Native ( ), # x86/x64. , x86 .

0

All Articles