Dear all,
in order to protect my assembly component from decompilation I implemented
following schema:
I created mixed mode C++ project wich has managed cProxy class and unmanaged
cMemLoader. In the cMemLoader I load encrypted assembly, decrypt it into
memory buffer and then marshal this buffer into managed memory and load the
assembly from memory.
Although I am not sure if this approach is good enough and how easy is it to
break.
Can anybody comment on this? Improvements are welcome too.
Thanks in advance,
Boni
void cProxy::Load(void){
m_pLoader=new cMemLoader(C:\\edit\\MyEncriptedManaged.dll
m_pLoader->DecriptLoad();
unsigned char _pManagedBuff __gc[]=__gc new unsigned char __gc
[m_pLoader->m_file_size] ;
Marshal::Copy(m_pLoader->m_pBuff,_pManagedBuff,0,m_pLoader->m_file_size);
delete m_pLoader;
m_Asm= Assembly::Load(_pManagedBuff);
System::Type *_Types __gc[]= m_Asm->GetTypes();
Object *_Instance = 0;
MethodInfo *_Methods __gc[]= _Types[0]->GetMethods();
_Instance = System::Activator::CreateInstance(_Types[0]);
_Methods[0]->Invoke(_Instance,0);
} 7 2408
Hi,
Did you try to obfuscate it first?
I would suggest you to use the tools accesible to the framework. In your
solution you encrypt the dll, meaning that the file in the HDD is not longer
a DLL, it's a data file. hence the framework cannot do nothing with it, you
cannot register it in the GAC, not using versionsing.
I would give a try to obfuscation first. Take a look at the community
version shipped with .NET
cheers,
--
Ignacio Machin,
ignacio.machin AT dot.state.fl.us
Florida Department Of Transportation
"Boni" <oilia@nospam> wrote in message
news:OS*************@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl... Dear all,
in order to protect my assembly component from decompilation I implemented following schema:
I created mixed mode C++ project wich has managed cProxy class and unmanaged cMemLoader. In the cMemLoader I load encrypted assembly, decrypt it into memory buffer and then marshal this buffer into managed memory and load the assembly from memory.
Although I am not sure if this approach is good enough and how easy is it to break.
Can anybody comment on this? Improvements are welcome too.
Thanks in advance,
Boni void cProxy::Load(void){
m_pLoader=new cMemLoader(C:\\edit\\MyEncriptedManaged.dll
m_pLoader->DecriptLoad();
unsigned char _pManagedBuff __gc[]=__gc new unsigned char __gc [m_pLoader->m_file_size] ;
Marshal::Copy(m_pLoader->m_pBuff,_pManagedBuff,0,m_pLoader->m_file_size);
delete m_pLoader;
m_Asm= Assembly::Load(_pManagedBuff);
System::Type *_Types __gc[]= m_Asm->GetTypes();
Object *_Instance = 0;
MethodInfo *_Methods __gc[]= _Types[0]->GetMethods();
_Instance = System::Activator::CreateInstance(_Types[0]);
_Methods[0]->Invoke(_Instance,0);
}
Dear Ignacio, dear all,
of course the dll is obfuscated before encryption. But just obfuscation is
in my case definitely not enougth protection (and it is the point, where for
me the decision is already done and will not be changed!!!). Please don't
misunderstand me, I don't want to discuss if it is worth to encrypt, but HOW
to encrypt so that the dll can't be decompiled.
Please could anybody comment on the strength of my approach or suggest how
to improve it?
Thanks so much,
Boni
"Ignacio Machin ( .NET/ C# MVP )" <ignacio.machin AT dot.state.fl.us>
schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:OM**************@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl... Hi,
Did you try to obfuscate it first?
I would suggest you to use the tools accesible to the framework. In your solution you encrypt the dll, meaning that the file in the HDD is not longer a DLL, it's a data file. hence the framework cannot do nothing with it, you cannot register it in the GAC, not using versionsing.
I would give a try to obfuscation first. Take a look at the community version shipped with .NET
cheers,
-- Ignacio Machin, ignacio.machin AT dot.state.fl.us Florida Department Of Transportation
"Boni" <oilia@nospam> wrote in message news:OS*************@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl... Dear all,
in order to protect my assembly component from decompilation I implemented following schema:
I created mixed mode C++ project wich has managed cProxy class and unmanaged cMemLoader. In the cMemLoader I load encrypted assembly, decrypt it into memory buffer and then marshal this buffer into managed memory and load the assembly from memory.
Although I am not sure if this approach is good enough and how easy is it to break.
Can anybody comment on this? Improvements are welcome too.
Thanks in advance,
Boni void cProxy::Load(void){
m_pLoader=new cMemLoader(C:\\edit\\MyEncriptedManaged.dll
m_pLoader->DecriptLoad();
unsigned char _pManagedBuff __gc[]=__gc new unsigned char __gc [m_pLoader->m_file_size] ;
Marshal::Copy(m_pLoader->m_pBuff,_pManagedBuff,0,m_pLoader->m_file_size);
delete m_pLoader;
m_Asm= Assembly::Load(_pManagedBuff);
System::Type *_Types __gc[]= m_Asm->GetTypes();
Object *_Instance = 0;
MethodInfo *_Methods __gc[]= _Types[0]->GetMethods();
_Instance = System::Activator::CreateInstance(_Types[0]);
_Methods[0]->Invoke(_Instance,0);
}
>but HOW to encrypt so that the dll can't be decompiled.
If your code can do it, so can I. Please could anybody comment on the strength of my approach or suggest how to improve it?
I would say it's pretty useless. It's trivial to break your code at
the right place and dump the content of _pManagedBuff.
Mattias
--
Mattias Sjögren [MVP] mattias @ mvps.org http://www.msjogren.net/dotnet/ | http://www.dotnetinterop.com
Please reply only to the newsgroup.
Hi Mattias,
could you suggest how to improve the approach, that it is not so trivial to
break?
Thanks,
Boni
"Mattias Sjögren" <ma********************@mvps.org> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:uk**************@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl... but HOW to encrypt so that the dll can't be decompiled.
If your code can do it, so can I.
Please could anybody comment on the strength of my approach or suggest how to improve it?
I would say it's pretty useless. It's trivial to break your code at the right place and dump the content of _pManagedBuff. Mattias
-- Mattias Sjögren [MVP] mattias @ mvps.org http://www.msjogren.net/dotnet/ | http://www.dotnetinterop.com Please reply only to the newsgroup.
Are you trying to protect against proprietary algorithms or are you trying
to prevent someone from thwarting your licensing system? You have to way
your options... Is spending all this extra time attempting to write an
"unbreakable" scheme worth more to you then putting that time and effort in
to marketing your application? You could waste your entire life away
trying to protect your software.
Even if you did find the perfect protection what will happen is that someone
will use a stolen credit card to order the software and get it for free
anyway.
"Boni" <oilia@nospam> wrote in message
news:Oo**************@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl... Hi Mattias, could you suggest how to improve the approach, that it is not so trivial to break? Thanks, Boni "Mattias Sjögren" <ma********************@mvps.org> schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:uk**************@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl... >but HOW to encrypt so that the dll can't be decompiled.
If your code can do it, so can I.
Please could anybody comment on the strength of my approach or suggest how to improve it?
I would say it's pretty useless. It's trivial to break your code at the right place and dump the content of _pManagedBuff. Mattias
-- Mattias Sjögren [MVP] mattias @ mvps.org http://www.msjogren.net/dotnet/ | http://www.dotnetinterop.com Please reply only to the newsgroup.
I am trying to protect algorithms written in managed code. By the way the
license manager runs in the unmanaged code, and if lisence is not valid
assembly will not be decripted.
So my only need is to prevent easy decompile in order to protect algorithms.
May be somebody has an idea how to improve my protection approach?
Thanks,
P.S. Please, I know not anything can be broken. I am trying just to raise
the level.
"Bill" <ms****@hotmail.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:%2****************@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl... Are you trying to protect against proprietary algorithms or are you trying to prevent someone from thwarting your licensing system? You have to way your options... Is spending all this extra time attempting to write an "unbreakable" scheme worth more to you then putting that time and effort in to marketing your application? You could waste your entire life away trying to protect your software.
Even if you did find the perfect protection what will happen is that someone will use a stolen credit card to order the software and get it for free anyway. "Boni" <oilia@nospam> wrote in message news:Oo**************@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl... Hi Mattias, could you suggest how to improve the approach, that it is not so trivial to break? Thanks, Boni "Mattias Sjögren" <ma********************@mvps.org> schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:uk**************@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl... >but HOW to encrypt so that the dll can't be decompiled.
If your code can do it, so can I.
Please could anybody comment on the strength of my approach or suggest how to improve it?
I would say it's pretty useless. It's trivial to break your code at the right place and dump the content of _pManagedBuff. Mattias
-- Mattias Sjögren [MVP] mattias @ mvps.org http://www.msjogren.net/dotnet/ | http://www.dotnetinterop.com Please reply only to the newsgroup.
I think your approach (obfuscation plus encryption) probably makes it as
hard as it's practical to make it -- maybe even harder. But neither you nor
your employer should labor under the misconception that there's any such
thing as bullet-proof protection. It's exactly as you put it in an earlier
message -- you are making it "not so trivial to break" -- not "impossible to
break". So long as you understand the distinction, well and good.
But in my experience, it's still better to innovate your competition into
irrelevance than to expend much serious effort in protection schemes. After
all if someone steals the code all they have is unsupported warez. I'm sure
you add enough value that any serious user would gladly pay for the product.
If not, you need to lower your price or add more value, or both. IMO,
protection schemes should only stop the most casual theives and keep honest
people honest, no more than that.
--Bob
"Boni" <oilia@nospam> wrote in message
news:uD***************@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl... I am trying to protect algorithms written in managed code. By the way the license manager runs in the unmanaged code, and if lisence is not valid assembly will not be decripted. So my only need is to prevent easy decompile in order to protect algorithms. May be somebody has an idea how to improve my protection approach? Thanks,
P.S. Please, I know not anything can be broken. I am trying just to raise the level. "Bill" <ms****@hotmail.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:%2****************@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl... Are you trying to protect against proprietary algorithms or are you trying to prevent someone from thwarting your licensing system? You have to way your options... Is spending all this extra time attempting to write an "unbreakable" scheme worth more to you then putting that time and effort in to marketing your application? You could waste your entire life away trying to protect your software.
Even if you did find the perfect protection what will happen is that someone will use a stolen credit card to order the software and get it for free anyway. "Boni" <oilia@nospam> wrote in message news:Oo**************@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl... Hi Mattias, could you suggest how to improve the approach, that it is not so trivial to break? Thanks, Boni "Mattias Sjögren" <ma********************@mvps.org> schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:uk**************@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl... >but HOW to encrypt so that the dll can't be decompiled.
If your code can do it, so can I.
>Please could anybody comment on the strength of my approach or suggest >how >to improve it?
I would say it's pretty useless. It's trivial to break your code at the right place and dump the content of _pManagedBuff. Mattias
-- Mattias Sjögren [MVP] mattias @ mvps.org http://www.msjogren.net/dotnet/ | http://www.dotnetinterop.com Please reply only to the newsgroup.
This thread has been closed and replies have been disabled. Please start a new discussion. Similar topics
by: dam |
last post by:
Hi,
since there are tools that can decompile assemblies and
show ENTIRE SOURCE CODE (!?) is there any way for
developers to protect their work ?
Or, is famoues .NET framework just for...
|
by: YK |
last post by:
All,
What is the best way to protect IL code?
---------------------------------------------------
Typical scenario:
Visual Studio .NET 2003 includes Dotfuscator Community Edition, which...
|
by: Enzo |
last post by:
Hi Ng,
It's possible to protect the source code of
a js file? With PHP?
Thanks in advance!
Enzo
|
by: Noone Here |
last post by:
AIUI, it was not all that long ago when the threat to personal users,
was attachments that when executed compromised machines with keyloggers,
trojans, etc.
Now it seems that the big problem is...
|
by: Usman |
last post by:
Hi
I'm working on an application that contains classes for licensing,
authentication etc, including all the algorithms of encryption/decryption
etc. I wanted to secure this code, but after...
|
by: Bayazee |
last post by:
hi
can we hide a python code ?
if i want to write a commercial software can i hide my source code from
users access ?
we can conver it to pyc but this file can decompiled ... so ...!!
do you...
|
by: FAQ server |
last post by:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FAQ Topic - How do I protect my javascript code?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
...
|
by: flit |
last post by:
Hello All,
I have a hard question, every time I look for this answer its get out
from the technical domain and goes on in the moral/social domain.
First, I live in third world with bad gov., bad...
|
by: Hystou |
last post by:
There are some requirements for setting up RAID:
1. The motherboard and BIOS support RAID configuration.
2. The motherboard has 2 or more available SATA protocol SSD/HDD slots (including MSATA, M.2...
|
by: Hystou |
last post by:
Most computers default to English, but sometimes we require a different language, especially when relocating. Forgot to request a specific language before your computer shipped? No problem! You can...
|
by: Oralloy |
last post by:
Hello folks,
I am unable to find appropriate documentation on the type promotion of bit-fields when using the generalised comparison operator "<=>".
The problem is that using the GNU compilers,...
|
by: jinu1996 |
last post by:
In today's digital age, having a compelling online presence is paramount for businesses aiming to thrive in a competitive landscape. At the heart of this digital strategy lies an intricately woven...
|
by: tracyyun |
last post by:
Dear forum friends,
With the development of smart home technology, a variety of wireless communication protocols have appeared on the market, such as Zigbee, Z-Wave, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, etc. Each...
|
by: agi2029 |
last post by:
Let's talk about the concept of autonomous AI software engineers and no-code agents. These AIs are designed to manage the entire lifecycle of a software development project—planning, coding, testing,...
|
by: isladogs |
last post by:
The next Access Europe User Group meeting will be on Wednesday 1 May 2024 starting at 18:00 UK time (6PM UTC+1) and finishing by 19:30 (7.30PM).
In this session, we are pleased to welcome a new...
|
by: adsilva |
last post by:
A Windows Forms form does not have the event Unload, like VB6. What one acts like?
|
by: 6302768590 |
last post by:
Hai team
i want code for transfer the data from one system to another through IP address by using C# our system has to for every 5mins then we have to update the data what the data is updated ...
| |