I'm in the position where I may need to update a site that lost its backup
project files. Is there any chance of being able to decompile the DLL files
or is this a case of starting over from scratch?
I'm looking at ".net Reflector" which looks like it will help, as I can view
individual subroutines/classes, but was wondering if there were any other
options I should look at.
-Darrel 11 1617
check out this addin for reflector: http://www.denisbauer.com/NETTools/F...assembler.aspx
HTH
Ollie Riches
"darrel" <no*****@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:e0**************@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl... I'm in the position where I may need to update a site that lost its backup project files. Is there any chance of being able to decompile the DLL files or is this a case of starting over from scratch?
I'm looking at ".net Reflector" which looks like it will help, as I can view individual subroutines/classes, but was wondering if there were any other options I should look at.
-Darrel
"Ollie Riches" <ol**********@phoneanalyser.net> wrote in message
news:OE**************@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl... check out this addin for reflector:
http://www.denisbauer.com/NETTools/F...assembler.aspx
HTH
Ollie Riches
Sad... spend months creating a component that takes a hacker 2 minutes
decompile and steal all of your hard work. Now, find a similar utility for
VB5/6.... <bing> Time's up. There is no such component/utility (even after
what.... 13 years? which is great). imo, If you are careless enough to lose
your source, you deserve to start over from scratch.
--
Ken Halter - MS-MVP-VB (visiting from VB6 world) - http://www.vbsight.com
Please keep all discussions in the groups..
"Jon Skeet [C# MVP]" <sk***@pobox.com> wrote in message
news:MP************************@msnews.microsoft.c om... Ken Halter <Ken_Halter@Use_Sparingly_Hotmail.com> wrote: "Ollie Riches" <ol**********@phoneanalyser.net> wrote in message news:OE**************@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl... > check out this addin for reflector: > > http://www.denisbauer.com/NETTools/F...assembler.aspx Sad... spend months creating a component that takes a hacker 2 minutes decompile and steal all of your hard work.
Has anyone got any actual examples of where this has really happened with .NET? I've seen a lot of people being worried about getting bitten, but no-one actually *getting* bitten.
Heck... I haven't seen any companies that use .Net for the kind of stuff we
write around here so that's a bit of a trick question. For that matter, I
haven't seen anything "real" written in .Net at all.
See http://www.pobox.com/~skeet/csharp/obfuscation.html for more on my views on this matter.
In your "No Software Is Truly Safe" section, you have "how many of your
potential customers do you think want to rip you off". In my case, probably
zero (for now). In a shareware authors case, probably 50%. That's a
shareware author that has to go spend >>at least<< $1500+ for an obfuscator.
Then, they can probably go to another site and find a crack to de-obfuscate
that obfuscator <g> Right here in this group, a few months ago, there was a
guy selling his disassembler/de-obfuscator that supposedly could "crack" any
obfuscator on the market. That's pretty bad. Even if only 1/4 true. Sure,
you can disassemble VB Classic code. What you end up with is raw assembler
language. There is no tool available that would take that assembler code and
"pretty it up" to make it look like VB source.
Your "Decompilation Makes .NET Applications Open Source" isn't a myth I've
heard. The Open Source community has licenses that specify what you can do
with the source you find there. Decompilation has nothing to do with any of
those licenses. If you can simply grab large chunks of code from a
component, re-arrange it a bit to make it look like it's your own work and
resell it, that's not open source, that's stealing hard work that someone
else did. Huge difference.
No customers can steal our source. Since we don't specifically protect any
of our components, if they can figure out the interfaces, they can install
and use our components on their own PCs. As previously mentioned, our
customers most likely have no interest in any of that. When they buy from
us, they're buying a machine that's controlled by a PC. The software is
never "sold separately" and, as long as it works right, the customer never
even opens the folder that contains our software (now to figure out a decent
way of sending 440 volts directly to any hot-dog network admin that wants to
muck with the PCs we ship with the machines, we'd be set <g>)
-- Jon Skeet - <sk***@pobox.com> http://www.pobox.com/~skeet Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/jon.skeet If replying to the group, please do not mail me too
--
Ken Halter - MS-MVP-VB (visiting from VB6 world) - http://www.vbsight.com
Please keep all discussions in the groups..
Ken Halter <Ken_Halter@Use_Sparingly_Hotmail.com> wrote: Sad... spend months creating a component that takes a hacker 2 minutes decompile and steal all of your hard work. Has anyone got any actual examples of where this has really happened with .NET? I've seen a lot of people being worried about getting bitten, but no-one actually *getting* bitten.
Heck... I haven't seen any companies that use .Net for the kind of stuff we write around here so that's a bit of a trick question. For that matter, I haven't seen anything "real" written in .Net at all.
Well, there are certainly things out there. The company I work for
(Clearswift) has been shipping software using .NET for longer than I've
been there. See http://www.pobox.com/~skeet/csharp/obfuscation.html for more on my views on this matter.
In your "No Software Is Truly Safe" section, you have "how many of your potential customers do you think want to rip you off". In my case, probably zero (for now). In a shareware authors case, probably 50%.
How many of those know about decompilers, or would actually have enough
technical information to use one to their advantage? I believe most
people who want to rip off shareware are likely to go to warez sites
rather than get a decompiler - and plenty of native code has been
cracked.
That's a shareware author that has to go spend >>at least<< $1500+ for an obfuscator. Then, they can probably go to another site and find a crack to de-obfuscate that obfuscator <g>
Obfuscators lose information. There's no way of recapturing it.
Right here in this group, a few months ago, there was a guy selling his disassembler/de-obfuscator that supposedly could "crack" any obfuscator on the market.
Obfuscators don't generally prevent decompilation - they just mean that
what you get after decompilation is very, very hard to understand.
That's pretty bad. Even if only 1/4 true. Sure, you can disassemble VB Classic code. What you end up with is raw assembler language. There is no tool available that would take that assembler code and "pretty it up" to make it look like VB source.
I suppose that's why commercial games are never cracked, right? They're
generally native code too...
Your "Decompilation Makes .NET Applications Open Source" isn't a myth I've heard. The Open Source community has licenses that specify what you can do with the source you find there. Decompilation has nothing to do with any of those licenses. If you can simply grab large chunks of code from a component, re-arrange it a bit to make it look like it's your own work and resell it, that's not open source, that's stealing hard work that someone else did. Huge difference.
Which is precisely why I call it a myth. It's one I've seen several
times though.
No customers can steal our source. Since we don't specifically protect any of our components, if they can figure out the interfaces, they can install and use our components on their own PCs. As previously mentioned, our customers most likely have no interest in any of that. When they buy from us, they're buying a machine that's controlled by a PC. The software is never "sold separately" and, as long as it works right, the customer never even opens the folder that contains our software (now to figure out a decent way of sending 440 volts directly to any hot-dog network admin that wants to muck with the PCs we ship with the machines, we'd be set <g>)
In which case, wouldn't it be nice to get all the advantages .NET
provides?
--
Jon Skeet - <sk***@pobox.com> http://www.pobox.com/~skeet Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/jon.skeet
If replying to the group, please do not mail me too
"Jon Skeet [C# MVP]" <sk***@pobox.com> wrote in message
news:MP************************@msnews.microsoft.c om... No customers can steal our source. Since we don't specifically protect any of our components, if they can figure out the interfaces, they can install and use our components on their own PCs. As previously mentioned, our customers most likely have no interest in any of that. When they buy from us, they're buying a machine that's controlled by a PC. The software is never "sold separately" and, as long as it works right, the customer never even opens the folder that contains our software (now to figure out a decent way of sending 440 volts directly to any hot-dog network admin that wants to muck with the PCs we ship with the machines, we'd be set <g>) In which case, wouldn't it be nice to get all the advantages .NET provides?
If I can zap someone with .Net, I can surely zap them faster in VB6 <g>...
maybe you weren't referring to my "440 volts" comment? <g>
Neither VB6 or Anything.Net can not stop the "hot-dog" admins from loading
screen savers, virus protection and running Windows Update. They tend to
treat the PCs we ship with our tools as "ordinary desktop" PCs, which they
aren't. They control servos, countless devices, multi-million dollar Lambda
Lasers, etc. No one, especially a "hot dog" should touch the "as shipped"
configuration. We have a notice in huge black letters in every owners manual
but that doesn't stop the hot dogs.
If interested..... http://www.tamsci.com/products/products.html
-- Jon Skeet - <sk***@pobox.com> http://www.pobox.com/~skeet Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/jon.skeet If replying to the group, please do not mail me too
fwiw, the very reason I'm starting to browse the .Net groups is that I've
finally convinced a few people here that VS2005 just might not be the devils
spawn. I've given up the hope of re-writing all of our components and have
started hoping that we can use a great deal of what we already have. It's
still pretty much "up in the air" though. We'll get one copy and see how it
works out. First of all, I have doubts about performance (if the IDE's any
indication, the entire suite'll end up in the recycle bin).... and doubts
about MSs recent ability to release a stable product (you don't need to poke
around here very long to see VS2003's still _full_ of bugs)
--
Ken Halter - MS-MVP-VB (visiting from VB6 world) - http://www.vbsight.com
Please keep all discussions in the groups..
> "Jon Skeet [C# MVP]" <sk***@pobox.com> wrote in message news:MP************************@msnews.microsoft.c om... In which case, wouldn't it be nice to get all the advantages .NET provides?
Besides.... I still haven't seen any of these advantages. Surely, the IDE's
not one of them. If it doesn't have an immediate window, or the ability to
set it so it shows a single procedure at a time, it's not much of an IDE
imo. The IDE should be flexible enough to "bend" to my wishes... not the
other way around. Even with those 2 show stoppers (imo), I still haven't
seen evidence of any of these advantages. If one of them is "the end to DLL
Hell", just poke around here and you'll see DLL Hell is no where near dead.
Intellisense in VB5/6 rules the world so that can't be one of these
advantages I keep hearing about. About the only feature that "sticks out" to
me as a true advantage is much better subclassing support "out of the box".
Neither subclassing or DLL Hell is an issue for VB5/6 devs with experience.
Threading maybe? Maybe. The apps we create run fine on a single thread. The
only multithreading I do in VB6 is for TCP-IP communications to several
devices at once.
So, who has the links to these advantages? I'll need a list (or at least
one) before I can justify the purchase (not counting the single copy I'll
get for eval)
--
Ken Halter - MS-MVP-VB (visiting from VB6 world) - http://www.vbsight.com
Please keep all discussions in the groups..
Ken Halter <Ken_Halter@Use_Sparingly_Hotmail.com> wrote: In which case, wouldn't it be nice to get all the advantages .NET provides? Besides.... I still haven't seen any of these advantages.
In that case I suspect you haven't used .NET enough.
Surely, the IDE's not one of them. If it doesn't have an immediate window, or the ability to set it so it shows a single procedure at a time, it's not much of an IDE imo.
I've never required either of those features of an IDE. I believe VS
2005 has an immediate window - I don't know if it allows you to only
view a single procedure though.
The IDE should be flexible enough to "bend" to my wishes... not the other way around. Even with those 2 show stoppers (imo), I still haven't seen evidence of any of these advantages. If one of them is "the end to DLL Hell", just poke around here and you'll see DLL Hell is no where near dead. Intellisense in VB5/6 rules the world so that can't be one of these advantages I keep hearing about. About the only feature that "sticks out" to me as a true advantage is much better subclassing support "out of the box". Neither subclassing or DLL Hell is an issue for VB5/6 devs with experience. Threading maybe? Maybe. The apps we create run fine on a single thread. The only multithreading I do in VB6 is for TCP-IP communications to several devices at once.
So, who has the links to these advantages? I'll need a list (or at least one) before I can justify the purchase (not counting the single copy I'll get for eval)
1) Proper object orientation
2) Proper thread handling
3) Managed execution ensuring safe memory handling (I don't know
whether or not this is an issue in .NET)
4) A very rich runtime library - and getting richer in 2.0, of course
5) Fast garbage collected memory handling - no need to set things to
Nothing all the time. (I don't know much about VB6's memory
handling, but I've seen a lot of ex-VB developers setting variables
to Nothing everywhere, which suggests it's at least common
practice.)
6) A richer error handling mechanism (proper exceptions)
7) Simple interaction with other managed languages
8) Code access security
9) Support from MS - does your company really want to be using an
unsupported platform from 2008?
Those were just off the top of my head. However, as I've said, I don't
know a lot about VB6, so I suggest you ask the same question in the
VB.NET group if you haven't already done so.
--
Jon Skeet - <sk***@pobox.com> http://www.pobox.com/~skeet Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/jon.skeet
If replying to the group, please do not mail me too
> Sad... spend months creating a component that takes a hacker 2 minutes decompile and steal all of your hard work.
Why is that sad? And why would you assume people would steal your code?
If you are careless enough to lose your source, you deserve to start over from scratch.
I agree. Tell that to the person that didn't archive the project for us.
-Darrel
> How many of those know about decompilers, or would actually have enough technical information to use one to their advantage?
Exactly. Software pirates will pirate software regardless of how much
encryption/obfuscation/licening/lawyers you use.
Comanies need to stop assuming customers are criminals. It's not a good long
term strategy.
-Darrel This thread has been closed and replies have been disabled. Please start a new discussion. Similar topics |
by: Johann Blake |
last post by:
I can hardly believe I'm the first one to report this, but having gone
through the newsgroup, it appears that way.
I would like to open a solution in the VS.NET IDE that consists of
multiple...
|
by: Shiraz |
last post by:
Hi
I just made an installer for an application that uses two external COM dlls.
On the surface, everything seems to be running smoothly and the the
application runs without any errors. However,...
|
by: Devender Khari |
last post by:
Hi Friends,
I'm facing a situation as follows, need help on identifying possible issues.
There is an MFC application developed in VC6.0, say ABCVC6.exe and another
developed in VC.NET, say...
|
by: ZMan |
last post by:
Scenario:
This is about debugging server side scripts that make calls to
middle-tier business DLLs. The server side scripts are legacy ASP 3.0
pages, and the DLLs are managed DLLs...
|
by: Oenone |
last post by:
I'm sure there's an obvious way to do this, but I'm missing it so far.
I have an ASP.NET application that relies on several DLLs to work. Currently
in order to get my site working I have to put...
| |
by: Brian Bischof |
last post by:
I'm having troubles getting the debugging process to work consistenly for
external classes. I got it to work once and then I turned it off. But now I
can't get re-enabled. Here is what I'm doing....
|
by: Dave |
last post by:
Hello
The application I'm building an installer for uses dlls which were
developed originally in C. Since the application itself is developed in
C#, these dlls were wrapped using SWIG....
|
by: Jeff Lynn |
last post by:
Help!
I recently upgraded my VS V6 to VS 2005 and was unable to build projects
that were perfectly ok under VS V6. Where VS 2005 fails was in the linker
resolving external DLLs, which are Open...
|
by: gopal |
last post by:
I am developing an application in CSharp - windows forms based, which
copies the DLLs both unmanaged and managed DLLs from a shared folder
and will overwrite the existing versions of managed &...
|
by: =?Utf-8?B?UmljaGFyZA==?= |
last post by:
Hi,
I usually deploy my ASP .NET application to the server by publishing, using
Visual Studio 2005 publish feature. This creates the Bin folder on the
server, with the compiled DLLs.
I've...
|
by: marktang |
last post by:
ONU (Optical Network Unit) is one of the key components for providing high-speed Internet services. Its primary function is to act as an endpoint device located at the user's premises. However,...
| |
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: Hystou |
last post by:
Overview:
Windows 11 and 10 have less user interface control over operating system update behaviour than previous versions of Windows. In Windows 11 and 10, there is no way to turn off the Windows...
|
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: conductexam |
last post by:
I have .net C# application in which I am extracting data from word file and save it in database particularly. To store word all data as it is I am converting the whole word file firstly in HTML and...
| |