• 0

dumb question, how to i close source?


Question

11 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 0

Well, Java is rather easy to decompile, so if you rely that much on lack of easy code extraction... You're basically screwed with Java.

Afaik at least.

I could be wrong.

Glassed Silver:mac

  • 0

Java compiles to bytecode which can be rather easily converted back into readable source code with a free tool like this. Java isn't meant for keeping your source code secure and even if you use C++ someone sufficiently dedicated will manage to reverse-engineer your code if they want to. I'm not trying to be offensive, but if you have to ask this question you probably aren't writing anything that would be worth someone's time to try to steal anyway at the moment. Just write your program, practice and don't worry about people decompiling your code because anything you do can only make it slightly harder for them, not stop them.

  • 0

Java compiles to bytecode which can be rather easily converted back into readable source code with a free tool like this. Java isn't meant for keeping your source code secure and even if you use C++ someone sufficiently dedicated will manage to reverse-engineer your code if they want to. I'm not trying to be offensive, but if you have to ask this question you probably aren't writing anything that would be worth someone's time to try to steal anyway at the moment. Just write your program, practice and don't worry about people decompiling your code because anything you do can only make it slightly harder for them, not stop them.

I do not take you comment offensively but I am making encryption programs and I am simply exploring methods to ensure no reverse engineering of the encrypted data can happen (or happen with extreme ease)

  • 0

Could look into an obfuscator. Not 100% foolproof(if somebody wants to decompile your code they will, there are no magic bullets for software protection) but certainly makes it a bit tougher.

  • Like 1
  • 0

I do not take you comment offensively but I am making encryption programs and I am simply exploring methods to ensure no reverse engineering of the encrypted data can happen (or happen with extreme ease)

Pure Java doesn't seem like a too great idea for me here.

Glassed Silver:mac

  • 0

I do not take you comment offensively but I am making encryption programs and I am simply exploring methods to ensure no reverse engineering of the encrypted data can happen (or happen with extreme ease)

A good encryption method is hard to break even if the attacker knows exactly how it works. Obfuscating your source code will NOT improve the strength of the encryption it performs. Everyone knows how AES works, for instance, yet no one can break it. The program TrueCrypt is open-source yet it is widely used to secure sensitive data and is considered secure.

Security comes not from obfuscation of algorithms but from the time it would take an attacker to break the encryption.

  • Like 3
  • 0

A good encryption method is hard to break even if the attacker knows exactly how it works. Obfuscating your source code will NOT improve the strength of the encryption it performs. Everyone knows how AES works, for instance, yet no one can break it. The program TrueCrypt is open-source yet it is widely used to secure sensitive data and is considered secure.

Exactly, encryption should be provably difficult to calculate the reverse of some function. Don't rely on security through obscurity, use logic and proofs!

  • 0

There is no such thing.

You can make it harder yes, if you want to completely stop people from knowing how your program works well then the best and only way I can see to do that is release your program in a non-working state.

If a computer can read and execute it, so can a human (with some effort/tools/hassle)

  • 0

I do not take you comment offensively but I am making encryption programs and I am simply exploring methods to ensure no reverse engineering of the encrypted data can happen (or happen with extreme ease)

A good encryption method is hard to break even if the attacker knows exactly how it works. Obfuscating your source code will NOT improve the strength of the encryption it performs. Everyone knows how AES works, for instance, yet no one can break it. The program TrueCrypt is open-source yet it is widely used to secure sensitive data and is considered secure.

Security comes not from obfuscation of algorithms but from the time it would take an attacker to break the encryption.

This!

OP, forget it, code obfuscation is not about protecting data, it's about making it harder for other programmers to copy your code. As Asik said above, just simply encrypt your data, and for f-sake don't create your own encryption algorithm, use something standard.

This thread is pointless, lets return conversation to your other thread or make a new one on the lines of 'help me design a secure chat client'.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Just the price of doing business. The scamble to pull as much from the web as possible is happening, and it's happening before a case like this changes how or what is legal do to with AI in terms of data harvesting. But even then as we've seen with the likes of Google who ignore cookie requests and just accept the fact they'll get fined, it's built into their business price model now. AI is here, its not going away. Their reward if any from the court case would be best suited to trying to incorprate AI or licence their end points as authentic human verified content. The problem is, as we've seen these same news papers are using AI themselves.
    • Which finger's fingernail are we talking about? I can see how not having this info can lead to massive differences in interpretation.
    • This Chinese company is reportedly developing a feature Apple and Samsung can only dream of by Hamid Ganji While companies like Apple and Samsung have been relatively conservative with their devices’ battery capacities in recent years, Chinese manufacturers have taken the competition to the next level by introducing significantly larger batteries. However, the latest report from China suggests that a local company may already be developing a smartphone with a whopping 14,000mAh battery. Chinese leaker Digital Chat Station claimed on Weibo that a smartphone maker is developing a device with a 14,000mAh battery. If true, it would be the largest battery ever used in a smartphone and could, in theory, provide up to a week of battery life on a single charge. The leaker did not reveal the name of the company behind the device, but there are some clues. This week, HONOR unveiled the X80 Pro Max in China with an 11,000mAh battery and 90W wired charging support. The company also launched the Honor Win in January, which packs a 10,000mAh battery. HONOR, a former subsidiary of Huawei, has a proven track record of developing smartphones with unusually large batteries. However, other Chinese brands, including Xiaomi, have also launched devices such as the Xiaomi 17 Pro Max with 7,500mAh batteries. Though Chinese users on Weibo also believe the company behind the new battery is HONOR. Interestingly, Digital Chat Station said the device with the 14,000mAh battery weighs around 220 grams, making it lighter than the Apple iPhone 17 Pro Max (233 grams) and slightly heavier than the Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra (214 grams). The iPhone 17 Pro Max currently packs a 5,088mAh battery in eSIM-only versions, while the Galaxy S26 Ultra features a 5,000mAh battery. Neither device is expected to see a dramatic increase in battery capacity in its next-generation successor. So when it comes to battery comparison, Chinese brands are unbeaten. HONOR smartphones are currently available in the EU, but the Chinese brand has no official presence in the United States due to restrictions imposed by the U.S. government.
  • Recent Achievements

    • First Post
      kinowa earned a badge
      First Post
    • Rookie
      krychek57 went up a rank
      Rookie
    • Grand Master
      Jaybonaut went up a rank
      Grand Master
    • One Year In
      Philsl earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Dedicated
      Scoobystu earned a badge
      Dedicated
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      461
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      172
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      137
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      78
    5. 5
      Xenon
      77
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!