与异步编程是否UWP的.Net原住民共同构成混淆无关？ [英] Does UWP's .Net Native together with asynchronous programming make obfuscation irrelevant?

问题描述

我读过<一个href=\"https://blogs.windows.com/buildingapps/2015/08/20/net-native-what-it-means-for-universal-windows-platform-uwp-developers\"相对=nofollow>这个博客（和读者的意见在其中）有兴趣，它强调UWP的二进制编译 - 旨在提高性能 - 但在同一时间玩的一部分在做逆向工程困难的，因为二进制汇编。在做逆向工程难度大，我也碰到过各种评论暗指如何异步/的await异步编程起着混淆了重要的作用（但没有看到关于这个问题，以报价作为参考的详细分析）。我也注意到一个有趣的还挺发人深省的参数的<一个href=\"http://www.$p$pemptive.com/blog/91-dotfuscator-ce/net-native-what-s-it-mean-for-obfuscation-and-dotfuscator-in-particular/824\"相对=nofollow>此处这更有趣，使这些不断变化的编程技术。

I've read this blog (and readers' comments therein) with interest and it highlights UWP's binary compilation -- intended to boost performance -- but at the same time playing part in making reverse engineering difficult due to binary compilation. On making reverse engineering difficult, I have also come across various comments alluding to how the the async/await asynchronous programming plays an important role in obfuscation (but not seen a detailed analysis on the subject to quote as a reference). I have also noted an interesting kinda thought-provoking argument here which makes these evolving programming technologies even more interesting.

确实 UWP净本地是异步编程使混淆无关？ 我们可以感受到一个普通UWP应用的知识产权保护（IPP）是与'好'混淆？

推荐答案

我一直觉得obfusation是错误答案的问题。

I have always felt that obfusation is the wrong answer to the problem.

但你是正确的：反编译和逆向工程.NET原生编译的程序的输出更加困难。这实际上将是比对IL混淆用来做更难。但它仍然不是，虽然是不可能的。

But you are correct: decompiling and reverse engineering the output of a .NET Native compiled program is much harder. It would in fact be even harder than what obfuscation on IL used to do. But it's still not impossible though.

我们可以感受到一个普通UWP应用的知识产权保护（IPP）是与'好'混淆？

Can we feel that a plain UWP apps's intellectual property protection (IPP) is as good as a non UWP app with 'good' obfuscation?

是的，事实上，它会更好。

Yes, in fact, it will be even better.

这篇关于与异步编程是否UWP的.Net原住民共同构成混淆无关？的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！