Re: C/C++ obfuscator

Louis Krupp <lkrupp@pssw.NOSPAM.com.INVALID>
30 Jan 2005 13:42:03 -0500

          From comp.compilers

Related articles
C/C++ obfuscator quicon93@yahoo.ca (Abbas) (2005-01-22)
Re: C/C++ obfuscator lkrupp@pssw.NOSPAM.com.INVALID (Louis Krupp) (2005-01-24)
Re: C/C++ obfuscator walter@bytecraft.com (Walter Banks) (2005-01-24)
Re: C/C++ obfuscator ppluzhnikov@charter.net (Paul Pluzhnikov) (2005-01-25)
Re: C/C++ obfuscator gneuner2@comcast.net (George Neuner) (2005-01-25)
Re: C/C++ obfuscator lkrupp@pssw.NOSPAM.com.INVALID (Louis Krupp) (2005-01-30)
Re: C/C++ obfuscator idbaxter@semdesigns.com (Ira Baxter) (2005-01-30)
Re: C/C++ obfuscator ppluzhnikov@charter.net (Paul Pluzhnikov) (2005-02-03)
Re: C/C++ obfuscator robert.hundt@gmail.com (2005-02-03)
Re: C/C++ obfuscator ppluzhnikov@charter.net (Paul Pluzhnikov) (2005-02-06)
Re: C/C++ obfuscator lkrupp@pssw.com (Louis Krupp) (2005-02-06)
| List of all articles for this month |

From: Louis Krupp <lkrupp@pssw.NOSPAM.com.INVALID>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: 30 Jan 2005 13:42:03 -0500
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com
References: 05-01-074 05-01-087 05-01-093
Keywords: C, tools

Paul Pluzhnikov wrote:
> Louis Krupp <lkrupp@pssw.NOSPAM.com.INVALID> writes:
>>Abbas wrote:
>>>I would like to know if anyone know about a commercial C/C++
>>>obfuscator. ...
>> Is SoftICE really that good?
>
>
> That has nothing whatsoever to do with OPs question.
>
> Presumably he wants the obfuscator so that he doesn't have to ship his
> library compiled with gazillion of g++ versions which are all binary
> incompatible. Shipping the source allows the end-user to use any
> compiler he wishes. Shipping object code with C++ API limits the
> customer to using *exactly* the same version of the compiler OP used
> to compile such code.


That has *everything* to do with the original post, which specifically
mentioned SoftICE, decompilers, and debuggers. It sounds to me like
the OP is talking about shipping executables.


Shipping obfuscated source, on the other hand, is an interesting idea.
Could the obfuscated code be optimized as well as the original? Would
it be easier to reverse engineer? You might be able to step through,
say, SPARC machine code and make some global sense out of it, but lots
of people can read a C program.


The source to be shipped would have to be tested on any compiler the
customer might use, but I'd agree that it would be nice to be able to
ship everyone the same thing.


Louis Krupp


Post a followup to this message

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.