protecting C# Programs (whats best) + Dlls? How to keep others out

[luciferc]

So i got a couple questions.

I have a wow.dll that i use for all my wow stuff.

Say i want to give my thing out. And i don't want others to be able to make projects off my wow.dll. Would the best thing to do is just put all my wow.dll files inside my main proj which seems stupid. Or is there a way to make it so i don't need to do that?

#2 whats the best obsfucator out there. or what do you use.

[T1B]

I hope this can help you..

CodeProject: Understanding .NET Code Access Security. Free source code and programming help

[arigity]

because of the way .net applications work there really isn't much you can do to protect your code. theres alot of public obfuscators which you can buy/E-steal but most have public de-obfuscators which you can also buy/E-steal.

if theres anything really worth keeping a secret i would strongly suggest just removing it from the dll.

if you do post something and someone uses it you could have any program based off of your DLL removed by request i'm sure the admins/mod would accomodate you.

[Jens]

take a look at 'dotfuscator' or '.net reactor'

[Apoc]

take a look at 'dotfuscator' or '.net reactor'

Both of which are VERY BAD for anything related to memory editing.

In all honesty, look at {smartassembly}.

If you're just trying to keep people from looking through your dll via .NET Reflector, just use .NET Reactor on low settings, and merge some other DLL into it. (Keeps people from figuring out what goes where, and what does what.) I personally always merge a 750kb DLL of useless code and pointlessly complicated method chains.

[ReidE96]

Remotesoft Salamander .NET Protector (C#, VB.NET, IL, MSIL, J#, MC++)

I've heard that thing is best for protection because it compiles to assembly.

[Apoc]

Remotesoft Salamander .NET Protector (C#, VB.NET, IL, MSIL, J#, MC++)

I've heard that thing is best for protection because it compiles to assembly.

HORRIBLE!

Yes it compiles to asm. But it also totally screws up any code you have. I've had a hard time trying to get that thing to even run my .NET apps after being obfuscated. I've only ever had minor issues with {smartassembly}, and that was due to some pruning issues that was taken care of with some simple attributes.

[maclone]

Looks like you have read the article about {smartassembly} I gave you, didn't you?

[ReidE96]

How d'you have enough spare cash to afford that, Apoc?! I've looked on torrent sites, but I can't find it, so I'm guessing you must have bought it. What about just straight up assembly code-ifying it, without obfustication first? Would it work then?

[Apoc]

Looks like you have read the article about {smartassembly} I gave you, didn't you?

I did, a long time ago. I bought it, and use it now. It's by far the best there is.

How d'you have enough spare cash to afford that, Apoc?! I've looked on torrent sites, but I can't find it, so I'm guessing you must have bought it. What about just straight up assembly code-ifying it, without obfustication first? Would it work then?

I have friends who have bought it. (I don't buy things without being able to try them first.)

[ReidE96]

Curse you and your knowing people with spare moneys :/

[suicidity]

{smartassembly} works well; The only thing I had a problem with was referencing things at runtime, but that was sorted by some ingenious coding and non-obfuscation of my public class.