Develop Reference

C# Hide external dlls [duplicate]

Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
Questions asking for code must demonstrate a minimal understanding of the problem being solved. Include attempted solutions, why they didn't work, and the expected results. See also: Stack Overflow question checklist
Closed 9 years ago.
Improve this question
I release a bunch of tools for free, but recently I have began to sell an application, that has private research, and people have been able to get my source code, and one person publically released my entire source. I spent a lot of time on this program, just to have someone crack it, and release my entire source.
How can I go about protecting my program? I have tried HWID, but people are still able to crack it. I know I am limited by C#, but it the most convenient to use. I just need a way to protect my programs from people trying to do this.

You could have a look at the many obfuscation tools that are out there, for example these:
http://gapotchenko.com/eazfuscator.net
http://orangeheap.blogspot.nl
http://confuser.codeplex.com (succeeded by https://yck1509.github.io/ConfuserEx/ and then again by https://github.com/XenocodeRCE/neo-ConfuserEx)
http://ntoolbox.com)

Well, the problem with languages like C#/Java is that they are generally much easier to de-obfuscate. The way to secure this is generally to put this stuff into a webservice, but you said you couldn't really do that. What about porting specific non-trivial functions over to a language like C, and obfuscate that. Your C# program could then use reflection to make calls to this external/unmanaged dll. It would increase the difficulty for de-obfuscating, but the problem is that if someone wants it bad enough, they can figure it out as it is client-side.
It may be that legal action is the only real solution here, but this is not a site for legal advice, and I am not qualified to give it if it were.
Additionally, this could be a business decision. Consider Making your software open-source and post a donation link. I am also not qualified to give business advice, but this is worth considering. It may actually increase your revenue, not to mention the other benefits that come with releasing open-source software.

There's Dotfuscator (http://www.preemptive.com/products/dotfuscator/overview). But the best solution in some cases is to offer what you do as a web site (Software as a Service).
Consider this tool for example to convert VB to C#: http://converter.telerik.com/
Or this tool to format JSON: http://jsonformatter.curiousconcept.com/
This may or may not work for you. I don't know what the nature of the software you're trying to protect is.

No, your code needs to contain the information needed to decrypt itself, its an impossible problem to solve.
Your best solution is to put your intellectual property on a server in the cloud that only you have access to. Give your customers a unique login, audit their access to check for abuse, off load as much grunt work onto your customers machines, but keep your algorithms locked into the cloud.

What are the different ways to create two very similar software packages in C# [closed]

Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 5 years ago.
Improve this question
I am writing a software suite which is essentially composed of two separate applications in C# .Net using WPF. Although they may look a little bit different they essentially work like a lite version and a full version of the same software package. The full version contains all of the functionality of the lite version.
I had previously done this by creating two separate applications which share a class library where all the common user controls go. But i am now wondering if there is any better design for this kind of architecture.
I was even thinking of creating one application and at runtime let it decide which version it was going to work as.
Could anyone with any experience with this type of problem please point me in the right direction.

Keep it Simple
My rule of thumb is whenever possible keep solution as simple as possible. That being said I would use the same composition you are using.
Usually break up projects like this:
Application Logic: CompanyPrefix.ProjectPrefix.Core, CompanyPrefix.ProjectPrefix.Data...etc.
Applications : CompanyPrefix.ProjectPrefix.ApplicationType.App, so some examples :
CompanyPrefix.ProjectPrefix.Web.App
CompanyPrefix.ProjectPrefix.Console.App
CompanyPrefix.ProjectPrefix.Wcf.App
Since you have two Wcf Apps might want to do something like
CompanyPrefix.ProjectPrefix.Wcf.Lite.App
CompanyPrefix.ProjectPrefix.Wcf.App
So in this example both CompanyPrefix.ProjectPrefix.Wcf.App and CompanyPrefix.ProjectPrefix.Wcf.Lite.App point back to CompanyPrefix.ProjectPrefix.Core or wherever your business logic is.
About Dynamically Loading Assemblies
There is a way to dynamically load your libraries at runtime, but unless you're dealing with a modularized system of independent components would recommend against it.
If your heart is set on it there are a lot of resources on MSDN, would probably start here. Article about loading assembly into current application domain.
Come Up with a Checklist
One thing I find helpful is to come up with a checklist to help me make decisions in case I ever get stuck. Usually ends up being something like:
Does this have business value?
Does this make debugging harder?
What are the Pros and Cons of doing it a new way versus the way I have done this in the past?
This isn't my exhaustive list but explains the point. This can really help too when you have a group of people that are largely sticking with choices for personal reasons that don't have any grounding, as well as a tool to use when you get stuck to make a decision and go with it
Dealing with Application Logic Changing (Write Clean Code)
Coming up with an over-complicated "never need to recompile entire application again" is a mistake I have made in the past. You're still going to need to deploy and compile something.
Most important thing about dealing with changes in application is to
Have Code on Source Control (most important)
Write Clean Code
Write Tests
Write Documentation ( I know no one likes to do this )
Write some more Tests
What will consume most of your time when dealing with application changes is debugging so focus on reducing the amount of time you spend debugging not a amount of time you spend compiling and deploying
For Deployment setup Continuous Integration
If you have the ability to setting up CI would eliminate 99% of the hassle of changing the application. You lose a day or two setting things up for the first time, but it is well worth it.
Check out TeamCity and Travis CI

Best way to add developer documentation to your Visual Studio projects [closed]

Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 5 years ago.
Improve this question
Basically, the question is: Where (and in which format) should I store textual developer documentation associated with my Visual Studio projects?
To elaborate: XML comments are great, but they don't cover all use cases. Sometimes, you'd like to describe the class architecture of the project at a high level, add usage notes to your library or just leave any other kind of message to future generations of developers working on this project.
I'd like to add these documents directly as files into the Visual Studio project, to ensure (a) that they are available to the developer without further searching and (b) they are version controlled (using the same svn/git/whatever repository as the source code).
Currently, I add a folder _Documentation to the project and use text files, but I'm not sure if this is the best solution. Visual Studio does not have an option for automatically word-wrapping text1, and manually fixing line breaks after each change is annoying. On the other hand, Word documents don't work well with version control, and TeX is too much of a hassle to set up and teach on each developer PC.
Is there a well-established best practice for this?
1 I know that there's Edit/Advanced/Word-Wrap, but this only affects the display, not the file itself.

I just had the same issue - only I noticed that I was able to add a HTML-file. Once opened, simply switch to "Design" at the bottom of the screen.
You may want to change Build Action from 'Content' to 'None'
As it is a hard-coded HTML document, it is also possible to use inline pictures (e.g. a diagram)
Also for my purpose (programming guide, architecture description. database use examples) I opted to create a separate project (_Documentation) as a Windows Forms, as this will allow me (or a new programmer) to have a running example.

I use GhostDoc (visual studio add-on) for documentation of my project as I add classes, methods, properties etc: http://visualstudiogallery.msdn.microsoft.com/46A20578-F0D5-4B1E-B55D-F001A6345748

You have the option, in XML comments, to include a lot of data that you can then pick up with a tool like Sandcastle (site) and turn into an actual MSDN-style reference site.
I tend to use this method and just write long XML comments (MSDN comment tags) (where appropriate) using the <para></para> to generate paragraphs and explain any patterns, business reasons or architectural information necessary to future modifiers/developers. I also use it to give usage examples.
A good batch of tests (well written and named) can also really illuminate the purpose of code, acting as a spec.
I hope that might be a little informative in your research :)

XML Comments is best for documenting the particular method and not ideal for writing long conceptual content. Long XML comments could adversely affect code readability.
I liked Conceptual topic documentation feature of Sandcastle, we can create and store Conceptual documentation whether functional or architecture related and merge it with Code documentation (XML Comments). Markups which you can use in writing the conceptual topics are extendable which means we can even adhere to Enterprise templates.

Open source code snippet repository [closed]

Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
We don’t allow questions seeking recommendations for books, tools, software libraries, and more. You can edit the question so it can be answered with facts and citations.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
Does anyone know of a good and simple open source code snippet repository? Ive seen many that are free services, but I want to host it myself. A few google searches just find the free services.

I use Wordpress with WP-Syntax plug-in for that. Selfhosted, easy, and all done by couple clicks :)

Can you clarify what you mean? Do you want one for your own personal use (what is wrong with the built in snippet management in visual studio? Are you looking for examples of design patterns? In that case maybe check java2s or the portland pattern repository. For snippets such as looping constructs, try catches, etc i love Coderush templates.
That being said, my personal opinion is that snippets are as evil as copy-paste. What you probably want is to refactor so that there is no duplicate code. And if you need to share code between projects - some sort of core library might be the way to go.
Edit: In the comments below you specify that you want snippets available via web. I don't have anything to recommend thats exactly like that but you should look into storing your snippets in visual studio and syncing them using LiveMesh. I know of several people that do something similar and they like it.
OOoooor...what's wrong with just a wordpress blog? You can set it to private access only. You get tagging, searching, syntax highlighting (via the google syntax highlight plugin) and a nearly 0 fuss setup.

http://code.google.com or sourceforge not good enough? Also, there is GitHub if you preffer git to svn.
Granted, it's not for short snippets, mainly, but you could easely use it for that.
Edit
Reading again your question and your comments, what you really want is an existing, open source, system to hold short pieces of text made in c#?
I'd guess you'd have to do that yourself, I know of no project to do just that :S

I'm also trying to understand what you mean.
As the top commenter said, there's visual studio. Or there's Github but that's for more of version control and can have some annoying sides when trying to organise things.
There's also Snippet Repo which you can post snippets, favourite other people's stuff. I guess it's like a social code repository.

I'd still suggest using existing sites. I often use Google Codesearch when I'm looking for existing examples of how to use a function or boilerplate code (just watch licenses of the code you are borrowing from...)
But it sounds like you're looking to host a pastebin.
pastebin.com has source code available.
Other variations are available, and wikipedia has a good comparison of pastebin software.

git + gitosis + gitweb
I have a repository specifically for small one-off scripts I'm unlikely to change or expand. Doing something similar for a personal library doesn't seem unreasonable. You want to manage source code; that's what source control is for.

Krugle has an excellent base and allows for quick searching and filtering.
Active State has a some good snippets with excellent reasoning and documentation.
Take a look into OpenGrok in conjunction with a SVN setup.

How to prevent decompilation of any C# application [closed]

Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by editing this post.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
We are planning to develop a client server application using C# and MySQL. We plan to sell the product on the shelf like any other software utility. We are worried about the decompilation of our product which does have some sort of edge over our competitors in terms of usability and bundled functionality.
How can we prevent our software from decompilation, so the business logic of the product remains intact?
We have heard about Reflector and other decompilers which makes our code very much vulnerable for copying.
Our customer base is not Corporates but medical practitioners who themselves may not do it but our competitors may want to copy/disable licensing or even replicate the code/functionality so the value of our product goes down in the market.
Any suggestion to prevent this is most welcome.

If you deploy .NET assemblies to your client machines, some kind of decompilation will always be possible using reflector and similar tools.
However, this situation isn't materially different to what you'd encounter if you wrote the application in native C++. It is always possible to decompile things - if it were impossible, the processor couldn't understand it either.
You're never going to defeat the expert cracker - they'll treat your security as an intellectual puzzle to be solved for the challenge alone.
The question revolves around how hard it is to defeat your licensing practices and the return on investment.
Sit down with a spreadsheet and look through the possible scenarios - the danger is probably less than you think.
Factors like "ease of use" are visible in your software for any user to observe - so you'd think it easy to copy. But, good User experience is rare (and seldom copied well), because most developers (myself included) are nothing like typical users.
I'd suggest you concentrate on making the job of a cracker harder, cause you can never make it impossible, just non-profitable.
One possibility to try: It's possible to pre-compile assemblies into native code as a part of the installation process. Paint.NET does this for performance reasons. I believe that once you've done this, you can discard the original assemblies and use the optimised, native code editions.

If it were me, I wouldn't be attempt to obfuscate; I would:
Not worry about it and aim to continually improve and stay in front
But secondly
Consider providing the 'secret' services over the Web. It's up to you to decide how critical and possible this is; but it does "prevent" decompilation, because the end user doesn't even have the code.

Google for .NET Obfuscator. You will find a lot of products that will help in this. Also there are related questions already asked in Stack Overflow.
Here are some:
Dotfuscator
Secure Team
EDIT: While searching for De-Obfuscating tools, I came across an open source tool De4Dot. This tool supports decompiling obfucated dlls created by most commercial tools and does a pretty good job too.

Intellilock has served our purpose well in terms of obfuscation as well as licensing. But I would not recommend the product as the support is not upto the mark. We never got replies in time for the problem we were facing. We had to search and research on our own or even change the business requirement to achieve some goals.
Via this answer I am not intending to promote or demote any software but just want make people aware about the product we are using so they can make wise decision.

The last time I looked into this, Spices.Net Obfuscator looked like the best thing on the market.
No, I don't work for them. :)

I use smartassembly. It is simple to use and also has the ability to send crash reports back too you built in.

The obfuscators others have mentioned are likely very good.
An alternative approach you might not have considered is to code some of the core business logic using a language that is fully compiled to machine code, such as C++.
The benefit of doing this is that it makes it far more difficult for someone to decompile your code. A drawback to this is that you have code in two languages to maintain. This might not be the best approach for your situation, but is useful in cases where only a small part of the code needs to be obfuscated while the remainder of the code is UI fluff.
As an example, your medical software package might be performing edge detection of say, certain glands for the purpose of telling a doctor the size of said gland. The algorithm for calculating the size of the gland from a bitmap image would be contained in a DLL written in C++.

to answer your question about the C++ wrapper around the .net code; I dont think it would work, because when you deploy the application the final c++ dll and .net dll containing the business logic code will be separate entities and the ones who want to get to your business logic would still be able to just pick out the .net dll and peek inside.

you might want to consider Remotesoft Salamander Protector
this is much better than anything else in that it makes it impossible to decompile to the high level language.
Of course, anybody who is an expert can spend enough time with your software and figure it out because it does decompile some,but it hides all the set and get methods
So, they can get a peak,but that is about it. they have to figure out the rest which lowers the probability of anybody just cracking it.
hope this helps

Writing on this thread after a long time. We have purchased a software called Intellilock which is helpful in preventing decompilation, obfuscation and also has a strong licencing module.
We did not go for .Net Reactor even though it has more prevention controls as Intellilock was serving our purpose well enough.