79 Replies
what type of project did you create?
@jIMMACLE windows
What type of project, though, as you were creating it
Console? Windows Forms? Class Library?
windows forms
so where are you not seeing an exe?
that is what it should look like
program.dll is the source code
Well I see an exe there
dude
i put the program.dll
do you want $singlefile?
dotnet publish -c Release -r <runtime identifier> -p:PublishSingleFile=true
Use of -p:PublishSingleFile=true implies --self-contained true. Add --self-contained false to publish as runtime-dependent.
-r RID and -p:PublishSingleFile=true can be moved to .csproj as the following properties:but to target multiple RIDs, you have to use dotnet publish with the -r option for each RID.
You can also add -p:IncludeNativeLibrariesForSelfExtract=true to include native libraries (like Common Language Runtime dlls) in the output executable.
You might want to instead publish your application compiled Ahead Of Time to native code, see $nativeaot for examples.
Single file publishing | Runtime Identifier (RID) catalog | dotnet publishin dnspy
yes, that is exactly what it should have
program.dll sourcecode
And it showed you the decompiled source code, yeah
So? That's what it does
modern .NET executables compile to a DLL with a platform specific stub to launch the program
if you want it to be all one file, look at the modix message
i was using framework 4.8
i mean ok there can be dll
which works differently
but the problem is
it build
as dll
not exe
and i'm trying to tell you that's not a problem
that is how it's supposed to work
so what i have to do ?
nothing
lol what
there is nothing wrong
you are misunderstanding what it should look like
how i can use obf
then
what is obf
obfuscate
don't, because it's pointless
$obfuscation
"Then finally, there is that question of code privacy. This is a lost cause. There is no transformation that will keep a determined hacker from understanding your program. This turns out to be true for all programs in all languages, it is just more obviously true with JavaScript because it is delivered in source form. The privacy benefit provided by obfuscation is an illusion. If you don’t want people to see your programs, unplug your server."
- Douglas Crockford
https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/a/155133
* Spend your effort on putting proprietary things in your api, and keeping the distributed code as empty as possible
* Use AuthN/AuthZ to control who/what/when/etc...
* Free obfuscation is worth the amount your paid for it -- it's already broken and most decompilers out there can make sense of it.
* Paid ofbuscation will bankrupt you unless you have a very strong revenue stream and can justify the additional cost with gained sales
* The "threat" of someone hijacking your UI and shimming it to make it provide them money is not a real threat. If this is legitimate software, you can ruin their business with lawsuits
- Cisien
Software Engineering Stack Exchange
Is it important to obfuscate C++ application code?
In the Java world, sometimes it seems to be a problem, but what about C++? Are there different solutions?
I was thinking about the fact that someone can replace the C++ library of a specific OS wit...
It's unlikely that your code is worth the license cost of the obfuscators that somehow work
okay
can u change the
dll name to different
and exe name to differennt
sure, change your project settings
if yes how
where
That's a namespace setting
visual studio dotnet change exe name in your search engine of choice is bound to have results
my settings like this
its good?
I don't see it specify the name anywhere
So while they look like they would work, unlikely they would change the exe name
okay where do i change the dll name and exe
Here, did the googling for you: https://stackoverflow.com/a/44188341/6042255
its not possible?
It very much is possible
thannks alot
to compile just exe
You just gotta use search engines
This wasn't even google, this was Bing
It is possible to compile to a single file, yes
$singlefile
dotnet publish -c Release -r <runtime identifier> -p:PublishSingleFile=true
Use of -p:PublishSingleFile=true implies --self-contained true. Add --self-contained false to publish as runtime-dependent.
-r RID and -p:PublishSingleFile=true can be moved to .csproj as the following properties:but to target multiple RIDs, you have to use dotnet publish with the -r option for each RID.
You can also add -p:IncludeNativeLibrariesForSelfExtract=true to include native libraries (like Common Language Runtime dlls) in the output executable.
You might want to instead publish your application compiled Ahead Of Time to native code, see $nativeaot for examples.
Single file publishing | Runtime Identifier (RID) catalog | dotnet publishi have dotnet but it sstart say
The system cannot find the file specified.
Visual Studio 2022 Developer Command Prompt v17.9.1
Copyright (c) 2022 Microsoft Corporation
i put in there the comment
This will show you the steps to do it with VS instead of the CLI
i dont have this section
Did you try scrolling down on the page?
sorry isee
like this right,*
If that's what the documentaton says, then yes
Looks fine
i just go folder right?
Yes
Folder
Pick whatever location you want here, any random empty folder
I like just
builds\ but anything works
i make same as u
If you mean using
builds\ then no, you didn't
But this will worki did the settings
like this
now?
this one not gonna work?
It will work
As I said, whatever directory works
Makes no difference
And yes, the settings having
Produce single file checked is fine
Self-contained is not needed, but also fine
Not sure why you set the framework to .NET Core 3.1 though, especially since earlier your target framework was set to .NET 8.0yes,
i think its worked bro
thank u alot
❤️
Nice
@ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
hey
do u know how can i obfuscate my file
8.0
with only exe cant do that
i have eaz
$obfuscation
"Then finally, there is that question of code privacy. This is a lost cause. There is no transformation that will keep a determined hacker from understanding your program. This turns out to be true for all programs in all languages, it is just more obviously true with JavaScript because it is delivered in source form. The privacy benefit provided by obfuscation is an illusion. If you don’t want people to see your programs, unplug your server."
- Douglas Crockford
https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/a/155133
* Spend your effort on putting proprietary things in your api, and keeping the distributed code as empty as possible
* Use AuthN/AuthZ to control who/what/when/etc...
* Free obfuscation is worth the amount your paid for it -- it's already broken and most decompilers out there can make sense of it.
* Paid ofbuscation will bankrupt you unless you have a very strong revenue stream and can justify the additional cost with gained sales
* The "threat" of someone hijacking your UI and shimming it to make it provide them money is not a real threat. If this is legitimate software, you can ruin their business with lawsuits
- Cisien
Software Engineering Stack Exchange
Is it important to obfuscate C++ application code?
In the Java world, sometimes it seems to be a problem, but what about C++? Are there different solutions?
I was thinking about the fact that someone can replace the C++ library of a specific OS wit...
i have eaz and more i buy with money
but with framework 8 it not works with the single exe
not dll
If you have some obfuscator thing, read it's documentation or ask it's support
Nobody here has ever used tools like that, myself included
So I have no idea how to use it