Reverse Engineering RET Homepage RET Members Reverse Engineering Projects Reverse Engineering Papers Reversing Challenges Reverser Tools RET Re-Search Engine Reverse Engineering Forum Reverse Engineering Links

Go Back   Reverse Engineering Team Board > Reverse Engineering Board > .NET Reverse Engineering
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 03-20-2010, 09:39 PM
OneQuestionOnly OneQuestionOnly is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 2
Smile CryptoObfuscator

Hi guys,

I'm a .Net developer and I want to protect my code before I release my application to the market.

I've spend a few hours reading posts in this forum and I came to conclusion that a decent solution is using SmartAssenbly for obfuscation and CryptoLicensing to protect my application with a good license scheme.

I would like to ask your opinion about CryptoObfuscator since I can use it with CryptoLicensing and is much cheaper as a package.

Does CryptoObfuscator provides some decent protection???
Better or worse than SmartAssembly?

I say decent because you guys can crack everything. I try to stop the junior crackers

Thanks in advanced,
Steve
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 03-26-2010, 08:54 PM
OneQuestionOnly OneQuestionOnly is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 2
Default It looks like a winner

By not answering to my question I assume you either can't crack a protected assembly with CryptoObfuscator, or you never done it, so I feel sfe to use it.

Thank you guys.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 03-27-2010, 04:20 AM
kao kao is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 184
Default

Well, what do you expect us to do? Search the whole internet to find a single file that's protected with it? Nobody uses CryptoObfuscator and there's a good reason for that.

From a quick glance - it will take 4-8 hours for experienced reverser, less than a week to medium skilled one. If you can provide your own crackme for test, I will gladly prove that to you.

And don't even get me started about "latest military strength, state-of-the-art cryptographic technology" that CryptoLicensing claims to be.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 03-27-2010, 07:18 PM
omnious omnious is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 1
Default

Perhaps you should focus more energy on making your application work 100% and be without bugs, instead of spending (wasting?) time on software protection.

Yes, I understand that you want to protect your so-called "intellectual property", but why bother at all. You do not have a board of directors, or share holders to report to, and need to make them feel good about their "investment" by adding some fancy software protection. And even then...

Just my 2c.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 03-28-2010, 07:31 AM
Git Git is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Torino
Posts: 1,797
Default

Lets keep it nice and friendly people. We don't want personal slanging matches here.

Git
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 04-05-2010, 01:54 PM
bball0002 bball0002 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 72
Default

[Please DO NOT quote whole messages]

Instead of waiting for our answers, you could have searched around the web and saw that CryptoObfusctor and CryptoLicensing 2009 and 2010 were cracked. It was as simple as making the method "IsTrial()" always return false.

But I'm glad you feel safe to use it.

Last edited by Git : 04-05-2010 at 05:02 PM.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump





Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.