Re: [Full-Disclosure] Re: Java class obfuscation

From: Darren Reed (avalonat_private)
Date: Thu Jun 19 2003 - 18:41:14 PDT

  • Next message: northern snowfall: "Re: [Full-Disclosure] Re: Java class obfuscation"

    In some mail from northern snowfall, sie said:
    > 
    > > I was wondering if anyone has any documents compairing the different 
    > > java class / method obfusction tools that are available.
    > > I am in particular currious to know about the ones that are very easy 
    > > to bypass vs. those that are extremely difficult.
    > 
    > You can't obfuscate java interpreted byte code just like
    > you can't obfuscate CPU machine code. The JVM would have
    > to be altered to ingest your obfuscated machine code.
    > Every type of obfuscation can be defeated as soon as it
    > loads the byte-code into memory for analysis by the JVM.
    > Thus, you may not have readible byte-code on the disk,
    > but, you *will* have it in core.
    
    The aim of obfuscation is to make it hard(er) for decompilers
    to work, not make it unreadable.
    
    The trouble in attempting to get from the output of "gcc -O2" back
    to C code (in comparison to "gcc -g") is the aim.
    
    Darren
    _______________________________________________
    Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
    Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Jun 19 2003 - 19:13:36 PDT