Joel Coehoorn 12 41 The principle purpose is not to circumvent piracy. The aim is to circumvent opponents from looking through my code. I understand they will do, they by now did.

I have never viewed any decompilers that crank out C++ code. I have witnessed several experimental kinds that make a reasonable endeavor at making C code, but they tended to be depending on matching the code-generation styles of a certain compiler (that will have modified, it's been awhile because I past seemed into this).

unwindunwind 400k6464 gold badges487487 silver badges618618 bronze badges 1 two The post continues to be appropriate to at the present time but I'd propose cutter.re as a contemporary Software to reverse engineer C++ binaries.

Slightly based upon your problem I'd maintain the legacy/binary DLL as-is and compose a wrapper DLL that will improve and/or include any extra behavior. The reasoning would be to combination the aged performance in a completely new DLL which imports the outdated one particular.

Reflector or other equipment ought to be unable to acknowledge my software as .Internet assembly in any respect. I know about some resources presently but they are quite expensive. Is there some other way to guard my applications?

Nevertheless the rename as well as the logic flow issue are Great And that i see no way for any person to truly browse your code following a very good run even though this system.

Encryptionizer encrypts the DLLs (Managed or Unmanaged) with the file level. So it doesn't modify the DLL except to encrypt it. The "engine" In cases like this is usually a kernel method driver that sits between your application and the running procedure. (Disclaimer: I am from NetLib Stability)

Sure, but none of these will handle to make readable enough code to value the trouble. You will spend extra time wanting to go through the decompiled source with assembler blocks inside of, than rewriting your outdated app from scratch.

David HolmDavid Holm 18k88 gold badges4949 silver badges4747 bronze badges 6 forty To clarify, IDA will only provide the disassembly. You can find an add-on dll decompiler visual studio to it referred to as Hex-Rays that could decompile the remainder of the way into C/C++ resource, towards the extent that's probable.

Placed on doctoral programs, but was offered admission only to master's applications. Would it be wise to accept?

Themida isn't For each and every cracker, It really is among the best protector on the market, it could also protect your .Internet software.

Should you are searhing for a little something more similar to IDA I heavily recommend Radare2. There is also ODA the online dissembler in case you Never come to feel like putting in nearly anything.

In the most up-to-date version of DotPeek it is possible to ideal click on an assembly inside the assembly explorer tree look at and click on the 'Export To Challenge' choice. This will likely put it aside being an obtainable Visual Studio Alternative and you can then make adjustments, debug in run time and recompile to exchange the initial DLL.

The best way which will help you (but bear in mind that they are also not total prof) is to utilize mixed codes, code your essential codes in unmanaged language and create a DLL like in C or C++ and after that safeguard them both with Armageddon or Themida.

I do not know the exact condition you've, and the amount the functionality the DLL implements to your software. But I would argue that normally It could be better to rewrite the missing DLL determined by the identified operation.