By using this site, you agree to our updated Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Manage your Cookies Settings.
446,281 Members | 2,216 Online
Bytes IT Community
+ Ask a Question
Need help? Post your question and get tips & solutions from a community of 446,281 IT Pros & Developers. It's quick & easy.

Dotfuscator and strong names

P: n/a
Hi all!

I'm doing some test of obfuscation of assembly marked with the strong
name
(Fw 2.0).

Someone can tell me how does this work?
I mean: if I have an exe and a couple of dll marked w/strong name and I

obfuscate the dll when I run the exe it crashes because cannot load the
dll
cause there are problems with the strong name.

Have I to choose between the strong name and the obfuscation or there
is
something that I'm missing?

Thanks!

Aug 3 '06 #1
Share this Question
Share on Google+
8 Replies


P: n/a

Wacom ha scritto:
Hi all!
I'm really sorry for the repost :(
Excuse me.

Aug 3 '06 #2

P: n/a
you have to resign your dll's after obfuscation. if you are using
dotfuscator community edition shipped with VS, then you're out of luck.

Wacom wrote:
Hi all!

I'm doing some test of obfuscation of assembly marked with the strong
name
(Fw 2.0).

Someone can tell me how does this work?
I mean: if I have an exe and a couple of dll marked w/strong name and I

obfuscate the dll when I run the exe it crashes because cannot load the
dll
cause there are problems with the strong name.

Have I to choose between the strong name and the obfuscation or there
is
something that I'm missing?

Thanks!
Aug 3 '06 #3

P: n/a
"SharpCoderMP" <cs*******@interia.pl.NFSPMha scritto nel messaggio
you have to resign your dll's after obfuscation. if you are using
dotfuscator community edition shipped with VS, then you're out of luck.
That's what I thinked :(
I wonder why the dotfuscator don't warning about this, and I don't know why
the obfuscated assembly seems to be resigned right :(

Ok... maybe I'll do the trick using ngen in place of the offuscation.

Thanks
Aug 4 '06 #4

P: n/a
Huh?

You can't delaysign the assembly, obfuscate it, and then re-sign it?
I've never tried this, but I'd have thought you should be able to do
this, that's what delay-sign is for...

Even the help "obfuscating, strong-named assemblies" says:

"Strong named assemblies are digitally signed. This allows the runtime
to determine if an assembly has been altered after signing. The
signature is an SHA1 hash signed with the private key of an RSA
public/private key pair. Both the signature and the public key are
embedded in the assembly's metadata.

Since Dotfuscator modifies the assembly, it is essential that signing
occur after running the assembly through Dotfuscator. You should delay
sign the assembly during development and before Dotfuscation, then
complete the signing process afterward. See the .NET Framework
documentation for more details about delay signing assemblies. Remember
to turn off strong name validation while testing your delay signed
assemblies!"

jliu

Fabio Z wrote:
"SharpCoderMP" <cs*******@interia.pl.NFSPMha scritto nel messaggio
you have to resign your dll's after obfuscation. if you are using
dotfuscator community edition shipped with VS, then you're out of luck.

That's what I thinked :(
I wonder why the dotfuscator don't warning about this, and I don't know why
the obfuscated assembly seems to be resigned right :(

Ok... maybe I'll do the trick using ngen in place of the offuscation.

Thanks
Aug 4 '06 #5

P: n/a
"John Liu" <jo******@gmail.comha scritto nel messaggio
Huh?

You can't delaysign the assembly, obfuscate it, and then re-sign it?
I've never tried this, but I'd have thought you should be able to do
this, that's what delay-sign is for...
mmm... and how can this be done using VS and Dotfuscator comunity ed.?
Dotfuscator.c.e seems that don't support strong name operations.

Thanks
Aug 4 '06 #6

P: n/a
Dotfuscator won't re-sign the assembly for you, but there's nothing stopping
you from using sn.exe to re-sign an assembly after Dotfuscator is done with
it.
"Fabio Z" <zn*******@virgilio.itwrote in message
news:uy**************@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
"John Liu" <jo******@gmail.comha scritto nel messaggio
>Huh?

You can't delaysign the assembly, obfuscate it, and then re-sign it?
I've never tried this, but I'd have thought you should be able to do
this, that's what delay-sign is for...

mmm... and how can this be done using VS and Dotfuscator comunity ed.?
Dotfuscator.c.e seems that don't support strong name operations.

Thanks

Aug 4 '06 #7

P: n/a
"Nicole Calinoiu" <calinoiu REMOVETHIS AT gmail DOT comha scritto nel
messaggio news:%23DYNj%23%
Dotfuscator won't re-sign the assembly for you, but there's nothing
stopping you from using sn.exe to re-sign an assembly after Dotfuscator is
done with it.
And can you tell me the procedure to do this?
I mean starting from what to do in VS to the use of sn.exe?

Thanks
Aug 5 '06 #8

P: n/a
See http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms227311.aspx for 1.1
instructions. In 2.0, the only difference would be that delay signing
should be specified via the project properties rather than via
assembly-level attributes.
"Fabio" <zn*******@virgilio.itwrote in message
news:%2****************@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
"Nicole Calinoiu" <calinoiu REMOVETHIS AT gmail DOT comha scritto nel
messaggio news:%23DYNj%23%
>Dotfuscator won't re-sign the assembly for you, but there's nothing
stopping you from using sn.exe to re-sign an assembly after Dotfuscator
is done with it.

And can you tell me the procedure to do this?
I mean starting from what to do in VS to the use of sn.exe?

Thanks
Aug 7 '06 #9

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.