Bytecode vs Binary

[dodoman]

So, my title is my question.

Whats the difference between bytecode analysis and binary analysis.
I alrady know, that bytecode analysis means compiled high level languages like java or c#
and binaries means binaries like libs ...

But whats the difference in the hex or binary view?

[Phygar]

bytecode isn't machine code. Binaries are machine code.

[Jadd]

bytecode isn't machine code.

It's not? Since when?

Edit: OP, I think you have your terminology confused. Binaries are any type of files containing non-human-readable data. This includes byte-code, machine code, assembly - whatever you want to call it. In the context of this and other reversing forums, a portable executable file is generally referred to as a binary.

[Confucius]

It's not? Since when?

Edit: OP, I think you have your terminology confused. Binaries are any type of files containing non-human-readable data. This includes byte-code, machine code, assembly - whatever you want to call it. In the context of this and other reversing forums, a portable executable file is generally referred to as a binary.

It isn't considered machine code if it requires another program to interpret it into machine code. Such as java bytecode and the JVM.

@OP, Bytecode is a higher level language compiled to a low level language to be read by an interpreter in order to work on more than one type of machine. Binary files are files that can be completely functional without an installer or interpreter, often times these will not work on different types of operating systems like a bytecode program (java) will.

[stoneharry]

It isn't considered machine code if it requires another program to interpret it into machine code. Such as java bytecode and the JVM.

@OP, Bytecode is a higher level language compiled to a low level language to be read by an interpreter in order to work on more than one type of machine. Binary files are files that can be completely functional without an installer or interpreter, often times these will not work on different types of operating systems like a bytecode program (java) will.

I agree with this definition because it was what I was told at university, studying CS.

The binary files - running on a operating system directly - function through direct system calls that are dependant on the operating system architecture. Hence why a Windows binary will not work on a Linux system due to them having different instruction sets.

Whereas .NET and the Java Virtual Machine (JVM) define their own instruction sets that can then be translated to any operating system in theory. It acts as another level, as the operating system can be defined as a virtual machine as well. This is why it is generally considered to be slower and why it is bytecode rather than a binary file.

Also JVM seems to do a lot of just in time interpretation of code rather than having it precompiled, and using tools you can obtain the full original source code, often including comments. I do not know enough as to argue this either way or state why this is the case.

There are too many loose definitions within CS.

[xalcon]

How do you call images, archives or any other non-text files then? I always called them binaries, but differentiating between executable and non-executable.