C# protecting application from code injection - c#

I just found out that even though I obfuscate my application it can still be cracked using code injection. This pretty much makes C# completely useless for me. Is there really no way to protect or make the process very difficult to do? Do 'crackers' have to know any class names etc. to do this? Thanks!
UPDATE: I'm trying to protect a binary (exe) not code.

I've read somewhere on here from several users that whatever the code is written in, it can be decompiled. Think of it like this, how else would the system know how to run the code? It is the same concept.
Usually though, most developers(that I know of) don't worry so much about this. Of course, this is a good reason not to have any sensitive details within your code but rather somewhere else.

If you're worried about protected industry secrets, it's impossible to send a computer the right instructions, but expect those instructions cannot be read by a capable person. If your goal is to stop somebody from modifying your EXE, why not simply sign your executable?
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/shawnfa/archive/2007/01/10/combining-strong-names-with-authenticode.aspx

Any of the .NET languages, and Java can be de-compiled. This includes .Exe and .dll files. What you will need to do is get an tool that obfuscates the code.
I've listed one below for you so you can get an idea:
http://www.red-gate.com/products/dotnet-development/smartassembly/

Are you sure your code is worth the trouble for someone to do that? Very very few applications are.

Related

Running CPython functions from C#

I'm working on a project where I need to be able to run a python function that depends on SciPy/NumPy. Due to this being an add-on to a project already in progress, using IronPython would not be an option.
Additional info:
Python.NET seemed to be a good fit, but I was unable to get the return value from RunString() (it would only return NULL).
Passing arguments and catching the return value (a tuple) is necessary.
The function is in a statistical package that was created by a support group for the team, so modification of that would also not be possible.
I'm at quite a loss for what to do. Any hints in the right direction are appreciated. Thanks for any help you can give!
I understand that this may be quite vague, but I cannot give explicit details to the project. If any clarification is needed please let me know and I'll do my best!
I guess you could write a DLL that uses the CPython API to expose the function, then call it in C#?
It's possible to embed the Python interpreter; although I've never done this personally, I guess it would be useful: http://docs.python.org/extending/embedding.html
Does it need to be portable beyond Windows? If not, perhaps you can embed the CPython interpreter with C++/CLI, wrap that in a nice .Net-ish interface and use the resulting code from C#. Never tried that, so I don't know if it's going to work.
Regardless if you go through this route or the 'write a native DLL' route, it will probably be easier to to embed python using Boost.Python, though I'm not sure if your wrapper code enough is going to be large enough to make all of this (compiling the Boost behemoth, learning Boost.Python, making sure it works with C++/CLR, increasing your target file size) worth it.
IronPython using DLR might be the way to go. Mind you it won't be the fastest way, but it seems like something worth pursuing if you're going to do this a lot. Another useful link
The ironclad project was started to allow using CPython extensions from IronPython, especially SciPy/NumPy it seems. I don't know how usable it is (and how actively it is still being developed)

c# compile source code from database

I would like to build an application framework that is mainly interpreted.
Say that the source code would be stored in the database that could be edited by the users and always the latest version would be executed.
Can anyone give me some ideas how does one implement sth like this !
cheers,
gabor
In .Net, you can use reflection and CodeDOM to compile code on the fly. But neither approach is really very simple or practical. Mono has some ability to interpret c# on the fly as well, but I haven't looked closely at it yet.
Another alternative is to go with an interpreted .Net language like Boo or IronPython as the language for your database code.
Either way, make sure you think long and hard about the security of your platform. Allowing users to execute arbitrary code is always an exercise fraught with peril. It's often too tempting to look for a simple eval() method, and even if one exists, that is not good enough for this kind of scenario.
Try Mono ( http://www.monoproject.org ). It supports many scripting languages including JavaScript.
If you don't want to use any scripting you can use CodeDOM or Reflection (see Reflection.Emit).
Here are really useful links on the topic :
Dynamically executing code in .Net (Here you can find a tool which can be very helpul)
Late Binding and On-the-Fly Code
Generation Using Reflection in C#
Dynamic Source Code Generation and
Compilation
Usually the Program uses a scripting language for the scriptable parts, i.e. Lua or Javascript.
To answer your technical question: You don't want to write your own language and interpreter. That's too much work for you to do. So pick some other language, say Python or Lua, and look for the documentation that lets your C program hand it blocks of code to execute. Of course, the script needs to be able to do something, so you'll need to find how to expose your program's objects to the script. Also, what will happen if a client is running the program when you update its source code in the database? Should the client restart? Are you going to store the entire program as a single row in this database, or did you want to store individual functions? That affects how you structure your updates.
To address other issues with your question: Why do you want to do this? Making "interpreted language" part of your design spec for a system is not often a good sign. Is the real requirement something like this: "I update the program often and I want users to always have the latest copy?" If so, there are other, better ways to go about this (just give us your actual scenario and requirements).

Protecting DLLs

Quite a few people have really taken interest in the dll's ivé sent them, and they're not the type that should be given away for free too often...
I was just wondering, if I were to sell my components, user controls etc, how would I go about protecting them, in terms of ownership/encrypting code (if possible) etc.. What steps have you taken to help prevent people using yours without paying for them?
You can use any commercial obfuscater which encrypt your functionality and giving error if decompile.
Here i have the whole list which are available in market.
I used many of them some are just encrypt string, public method, private methods,properties and all.
Just go through it.
see the whole list and article
The only truly secure way to protect your dll is not to give it to them. Expose it instead via a web-service etc (obviously this doesn't work in all cases). Every obfuscator can be broken with patience. Think how much the games industry spends on this, and things are broken / reverse-engineered within days, sometimes hours.
"Lawyers" may serve as a layer of protection, and obfuscation will certainly discourage idle browsing. But a determined hacker (for example, for commercial illegal spying) will be able to get at your code eventually.
I guess you simply need to weigh the costs and benefits...
Well, I will definitely put my copy right,company name and production name information to my DLL. Whenever anybody use it,those information still appear on my DLL. And if possible,I will try to use Dotfuscator tool from visual Studio which helps to obfuscate my DLL.

How to protect dlls?

How do I protect the dlls of my project in such a way that they cannot be referenced and used by other people?
Thanks
The short answer is that beyond the obvious things, there is not much you can do.
The obvious things that you might want to consider (roughly in order of increasing difficulty and decreasing plausibility) include:
Static link so there is no DLL to attack.
Strip all symbols.
Use a .DEF file and an import library to have only anonymous exports known only by their export ids.
Keep the DLL in a resource and expose it in the file system (under a suitably obscure name, perhaps even generated at run time) only when running.
Hide all real functions behind a factory method that exchanges a secret (better, proof of knowledge of a secret) for a table of function pointers to the real methods.
Use anti-debugging techniques borrowed from the malware world to prevent reverse engineering. (Note that this will likely get you false positives from AV tools.)
Regardless, a sufficiently determined user can still figure out ways to use it. A decent disassembler will quickly provide all the information needed.
Note that if your DLL is really a COM object, or worse yet a CLR Assembly, then there is a huge amount of runtime type information that you can't strip off without breaking its intended use.
EDIT: Since you've retagged to imply that C# and .NET are the environment rather than a pure Win32 DLL written in C, then I really should revise the above to "You Can't, But..."
There has been a market for obfuscation tools for a long time to deal with environments where delivery of compilable source is mandatory, but you don't want to deliver useful source. There are C# products that play in that market, and it looks like at least one has chimed in.
Because loading an Assembly requires so much effort from the framework, it is likely that there are permission bits that exert some control for honest providers and consumers of Assemblies. I have not seen any discussion of the real security provided by these methods and simply don't know how effective they are against a determined attack.
A lot is going to depend on your use case. If you merely want to prevent casual use, you can probably find a solution that works for you. If you want to protect valuable trade secrets from reverse engineering and reuse, you may not be so happy.
You're facing the same issue as proponents of DRM.
If your program (which you wish to be able to run the DLL) is runnable by some user account, then there is nothing that can stop a sufficiently determined programmer who can log on as that user from isolating the code that performs the decryption and using that to decrypt your DLL and run it.
You can of course make it inconvenient to perform this reverse engineering, and that may well be enough.
Take a look at the StrongNameIdentityPermissionAttribute. It will allow you to declare access to your assembly. Combined with a good code protection tool (like CodeVeil (disclaimer I sell CodeVeil)) you'll be quite happy.
You could embed it into your executable, and extract and loadlibrary at runtime and call into it. Or you could use some kind of shared key to encrypt/decrypt the accompanying file and do the same above.
I'm assuming you've already considered solutions like compiling it in if you really don't want it shared. If someone really wants to get to it though, there are many ways to do it.
Have you tried .Net reactor? I recently came across it. Some people say its great but I am still testing it out.
Well you could mark all of your "public" classes as "internal" or "protected internal" then mark you assemblies with [assembly:InternalsVisibleTo("")] Attribute and no one but the marked assemblies can see the contents.
You may be interested in the following information about Friend assemblies:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/0tke9fxk(VS.80).aspx

Encrypt my framework and code

i am creating my own CMS frame work, because many of the clients i have, the have same requirements, like news module, newsletter module, etc.
now i am doing it fine, the only thing that is bothering me, is if a client wants to move from my server he would ask me to gibe him his files, and of course if i do so the new person who will take it he will see all my code, use it and benefit from i, and this is so bad for me that i spend all this time on creating my system and any one can easily see the code, plus he will see all the logic for my system, and he can easily know how other clients of mine sites are working, and that is a threat to me, finally i am using third party controls that i have paid for their license, and i don't want him to take it on a golden plate.
now what is the best way to solve this ? i thought it is encrypting, but how can i do that and how efficient is it ?
-should i merge all my CS files and Dlls in bin folder to one Dll and encrypt it, and how can i do that ?
i totally appreciate all the help on this matter as it is really crucial for me.
you should read this
Best .NET obfuscation tools/strategy
How effective is obfuscation?
In my experience, this is rarely worth the effort. Lots of companies who provide libraries like this don't bother obfuscating their code (Telerik, etc).
Especially considering what you are writing (CMSes are everywhere), you'd likely see more benefit from your time spent implementing features that put your product/implementation in a competitive advantage and make companies see that the software you are capable of writing has value, rather than the code itself.
In the end, you want to ensure you are a key factor in making software work for a company, not the DLLs you give them.
You'll need to precompile your site and obfuscate dlls.
Visual Studio has something like Dotfuscator Community Edition shipped with it. You could give it a try.
Of course, HTML output, CSS declarations, database structure and stored procedures code cannot be encrypted.
You can however try to compress CSS which will also reduce its readbility by humans.
Check here: The best approach to scramble CSS definitions to a human-unreadable state throughout an ASP.NET application
One other idea would be to use a frame in your HTML and put the most of the site pages inside of it. This way, it will not be visible when doing "View source".
Or just state it clearly that you offer whatever you're doing as a service and do not provide source codes of your work. I somehow doubt salesforce would be willing to give their sources to anyone who asks.

Categories

Resources