It's difficult to tell what is being asked here. This question is ambiguous, vague, incomplete, overly broad, or rhetorical and cannot be reasonably answered in its current form. For help clarifying this question so that it can be reopened, visit the help center.
Closed 11 years ago.
Are there any known issues to using the Dotfuscator community edition except for it slowing down the execution speed a little bit?
Is there any thing that I should change in my code before using the dotfuscator?
I am not sure but once a client reported a strange behavior that was not happen before a release with dotfuscator, so I give the client the SAME release but without a dotfuscator and every thing return to normal.
Thanks in advanced.
If you are using Dotfuscator Community Edition (which only supports renaming), there will not be any hit to performance. Transforms that can negatively impact performance such as control flow obfuscation and string encryption are unfortunately not included in the Community Edition.
As Stecya explained however, renaming can break all sorts of scenarios where the behavior is determined at run-time instead of during static analysis. Just off the top of my head, scenarios that can break include using reflection (either directly, or indirectly by for example using Enum.Parse), having code references in non-code files (such as XAML), and automatic serialization (without explicitly naming data members).
You should carefully use dotfuscator, and obfuscate only that parts that need to be hidden.
For example obfuscation may break code if you are using Reflection
Related
It's difficult to tell what is being asked here. This question is ambiguous, vague, incomplete, overly broad, or rhetorical and cannot be reasonably answered in its current form. For help clarifying this question so that it can be reopened, visit the help center.
Closed 10 years ago.
I am trying to come up with a way to import our current large application into a UML diagram for LucidCharts. LucidCharts supports a vdx XML format from visio. I'm just mainly trying to find a way to do this easily instead of typing each class name and method into LucidCharts. Linking and call chain linking I don't care about as much as I can do that myself.
Are there any easy solutions, or something I can do to read the meta data and make a vdx complaint file?
Actually, there are several open source & commercial tools that will create UML diagram from the C# project and visa-verse. As example, i will try to list three of them:
Option #1: Try to use the Modelmaker. It can work with both Delphi and C#.
I should add that it does more than just diagrams, it can be used for reverse engineering, refactoring and the like. It's been going for a while now and has many great features.
Option #2: You may also try NDepend tool for .NET developers. It comes with both a dependency graph and a dependency matrix and integrates in VS. The graph and matrix can be generated from .NET assemblies and they are interactive. You can download and use the free trial edition for a while and make your own opinion.
Option #3: The Guys at Tigris.org have also done some work on this.
Here is the Open Source Link to the project. It is also very impressive.
It's difficult to tell what is being asked here. This question is ambiguous, vague, incomplete, overly broad, or rhetorical and cannot be reasonably answered in its current form. For help clarifying this question so that it can be reopened, visit the help center.
Closed 10 years ago.
I cant even begin to understand how they work, its a very broad question i guess. How is it possible that one could take a language such as C# which is compiled to IL for the CLR, then further JIT compiled into machine code at run time, and write an Interpreter or REPL for it as implemented in the mono project. How did they get that right?
What is the issue? Machine code is just some data (laying in virtual memory pages which are executable). You can produce that data, then, since it is also code, run it.
You can produce machine code in memory in various ways. For example, you could use LLVM or libjit or many other libraries (or even make your own).
Some implementations of some langauges (I was thinking of the SBCL implementation of Common Lisp) are even able to translate to machine code every line you are interactively typing. And this is not new, some 1957 computers did it (e.g. the French CAB500 for PAF).
You can even generate some source code (e.g. in C), fork a compilation process, then dynamically load that code, e.g. with dlopen(3). Current compilers and processors are fast enough to make that compatible with delays for user-friendly interaction. My MELT domain specific language (to extend GCC) does that successfully.
AS commented by millimoose, Mono is free software, so you can study its code.
The equivalence of code and data is a fundamental property of computers. Likewise the equivalence of numbers and demonstrations in a fundamental insight of Gödel and Turing (and when you hear your favorite MP3 music, you use that too).
It's difficult to tell what is being asked here. This question is ambiguous, vague, incomplete, overly broad, or rhetorical and cannot be reasonably answered in its current form. For help clarifying this question so that it can be reopened, visit the help center.
Closed 10 years ago.
I need to get a hold of the ORIGINAL source code for System.Numerics.BigInteger with developer comments and sensible variable names. I know how to decompile assemblies and that is not the answer I'm looking for.
What I have tried:
Downloading the source code for both .NET 4 and 4.5 but BigInteger is not included for some reason.
Source stepping by following MS instructions but that did not work due to this issue with SP1 and I don't have the option of rolling back on my dev machine. Nor do I have access to another dev-capable machine.
I'm sure many of you have used source-stepping to debug and/or view BCL source code. If you have, please post the BigInteger and dependent code as an answer. If doing that crosses any legal boundaries, please let me know the same so I can jump at alternatives. If you do suggest alternatives, please include a concrete reason for doing so.
This has been asked before on MSDN BigInteger source code
Your not going to get it with code comments unless you have access to the private Micrsoft source and symbol servers.
The source stepping is your best bet. I too have experienced the problems you mention and found the RedGate source stepper (part of Reflector trial on a VM) does the trick.
An alternate would be to use a 3rd party if you dont have time to write your own:
http://www.codeproject.com/Articles/2728/C-BigInteger-Class
UPDATE:
.NET Framework 4.8: http://referencesource.microsoft.com/#System.Numerics/System/Numerics/BigInteger.cs,035eb7acfa6585a0
.NET 5+: https://github.com/dotnet/runtime/blob/main/src/libraries/System.Runtime.Numerics/src/System/Numerics/BigInteger.cs
This is the BigInteger source code according to JustDecompiler, given the framework's dll of BigInteger: http://pastebin.com/hFXJ7m8p
It's difficult to tell what is being asked here. This question is ambiguous, vague, incomplete, overly broad, or rhetorical and cannot be reasonably answered in its current form. For help clarifying this question so that it can be reopened, visit the help center.
Closed 11 years ago.
I have written a program in .net C# to encrypt some information.
To accomplish the task I used an array which contains confidential information.I need to know that is it possible to crack the exe.I mean can anybody get the array from the exe file.The array values are not shown in the application.I used community version of Dotfuscator which comes with Visual Studio.NET.
All I want to know that is it possible to extract the exe to access the member variables used in it.. ??
Yes, it would be very easy to decompile the application. You might want to install and run Reflector (or a similar equivalent) and see what gets exposed. Fundamentally, if there's sensitive information embedded in the application, it can always be found.
Definitely yes, if you didn't encrypt the Exe by using Dotfuscator or any other protection software, the cracker not just can see your array variables, but can return the whole source code of your application.
It's difficult to tell what is being asked here. This question is ambiguous, vague, incomplete, overly broad, or rhetorical and cannot be reasonably answered in its current form. For help clarifying this question so that it can be reopened, visit the help center.
Closed 12 years ago.
Is it so that the regular developers focus on writing their Contracts locally and then submit them to be analysed globally?
Or is there a way to get something comparable to this experience? Maybe as a separate download?
Also if a library have Contracts, then would the intellisense tooltips would include the Contracts no matter what version of VS is used?
I believe it was forked off into a seperate project (on Devlabs) instead of a built-in / pre-packaged feature of Visual Studio.
Why did they make this change? That's a question for the developers I think. I guess they wanted to expose the concept separately, maybe allowing it to be used not just within studio.
Also, from my understanding of the package you'll download; you wont see any change in behavior with IntelliSense, It should integrate fully with visual studio's feature-set.
How-to: Install Code Contracts on Visual Studio 2010
Code Contracts Project Page (Devlabs)