![]() ![]()
net including asp.net and remoting, you just have to become intimate with the settings and learn how far you can push it in which areas of your code. In my experience any obfuscator will work fine with any aspect of. Actually my advice would be more along the lines of "Avoid encrypting loader type obfuscators like the plague". I've had no problems with using any obfuscator with the exception of the encrypting type which generates a loader which can be problematic in all sorts of unexpected ways and just not worth it in my opinion. We have a multi tier app with an asp.net and winform interface that also supports remoting. I would recommend key-signing your assemblies (meaning if hackers can recompile one they have to recompile all) but I don't think obfuscation's worth it. XENOCODE POSTBUILD 2009 FOR .NET CRACK CODEWhat code they got out of that would be unmaintainable and highly likely to be very buggy. XENOCODE POSTBUILD 2009 FOR .NET CRACK PROFESSIONALYour decompiled code ends up a long long way from compilable.Ī professional team with lots of time could still reverse engineer it back again, but then the same is true of any obfuscated code. Add lambda expressions, compiler 'magic' like Linq-syntax and var, and C#2 functions like yield (which results in new classes with unreadable names). Try decompiling a 3.5 assembly what you get is a long long way from compiling.Īdd the optimisations from 3.5 (far better than 1.1) and the way anonymous types, delegates and so on are handled by reflection (they are a nightmare to recompile). Net 1.1 obfuscation was essential: decompiling code was easy, and you could go from assembly, to IL, to C# code and have it compiled again with very little effort. Note: ConfuserEx is reportedly "broken" according to Issue #498 on their GitHub repo.īack with. Sounds ominous.Ĭonfuser - an open source project which works quite well (to confuse ppl, just as the name implies). Currently in discussions to get a quotation. XENOCODE POSTBUILD 2009 FOR .NET CRACK PROPrice point is still a bit hefty.ĭotfuscator Pro - Couldn't find price on website. I was able to achieve everything I wanted and the Interface was first class. SmartAssembly - I downloaded the Eval for this and it worked flawlessly. ![]() This makes it impossible to achieve the result I needed (Merge multiple assemblies together, obfuscate some, not-Obfuscate others). Unfortunately, It is missing a key feature and that is the ability to Exclude stuff from the obfuscation. The Licencing module was also nice and would have saved me a bunch of effort. Reactor.Net - This is a much more attractive price point and it worked fine on my Standalone Executeable. This might be a good tool but I'm not going to find out. ![]() ![]() net 3.5 and I am on Vista, support told me to give it a go but the 2005 version does not even work on Vista (crashes) so I and now I have to buy 'PostBuild2008' at a gobsmacking price point of $1900. It worked fine on XP and was a decent solution. Xenocode - I have an old licence for Xenocode2005 which I used to use for obfuscating my. I am 'Knee Deep' in this now, trying to find a good solution. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |