Jump to content
Tuts 4 You

Should I build a simple .NET packer?


CodeExplorer

Should I build a simple .NET packer?  

39 members have voted

  1. 1. Should I build a simple .NET packer?

    • Yes, build it since it is useful
    • No, don't build it since is not useful


Recommended Posts

My ideea is to build a .NET packer,
no good protection against reverse enginnering,
but best optimizations and minim file size.

 

Please vote!
 

  • Like 2
Link to comment

@kao:


I already have one private .NET packer but is not good against reverse engineering. So probably I won't learn anything new!


The purpose of my question was to ask peoples if they will use such simple .NET packer,


or building it is useless!

Link to comment

Well, achieving great compression ratio in .net is harder than it seems. So, if you're into that algorithms, demoscene, "making every byte useful" and that kinda stuff, you could learn quite a few things.

But I'm not sure people will actually use it much. We have Netz, Mpress and few more packers buf I haven't seen them being used in real life.

  • Like 1
Link to comment

I think it will be useful to decompress the executable and embed the components.


 


If you can add a feature like embedding not "Merging" the needed DLLs, I mean native AND managed DLLs , It will be a great project.


  • Like 1
Link to comment

i think is a really bad idea to make a packer for the people, if you want make a packer would be better if keep it private for you, if you release a packer some guys will use it for protect malware and it will be detected by almost all antivirus like happens with Confuser Packer, anyway is just my opinion and you can do what you want, but i think is an stupid idea ask if the people want it because almost all of them will say yes.


Edited by Alcatraz3222
  • Like 1
Link to comment

you may spend your time for more important things like an .NET packer :D


 


why not coding a "farbrausch v2m lib" in .NET ?


 


requested by many ppl


Edited by udg
Link to comment
  • 1 month later...
CodeExplorer

The problem with my packer is that some antivirus (like Avira) says it is infected with TR/Dropper.Gen (obviously false positive but still enoyning).


http://www.codeplex.com/exepack suffer of the same problem.


 


http://www.matcode.com/mpress.htm MPRESS is cool! No false positive detection.


So my recommendation is to use MPRESS instead.


Edited by CodeCracker
  • Like 3
Link to comment
  • 2 weeks later...

Would definitely be interesting to see a really good .NET packer. Regardless of the protection(s), if any, it would help a ton for applications that use a lot of graphics, or resource intensive things like WPF. A handful of my projects bundle all the required libraries into the files resources to be loaded from memory. The result is a nice and clean single file release, but that file can become rather large depending on what is used. 


 


It would be nice if there was a packer that could really shrink the size well. :) Interested to see if you do make a public one.


Link to comment
  • 2 months later...

I can agree with Alcatraz.


If you will code and release a packer people will abuse it and probably use it to protect malware.


Just look what happens to Confuser/ConfuserEx... Pretty much every .net virus/keylogger is packed by


the Confuser-Packer.


So I would vote for no, if you develop one I personally would keep it private.


Furthermore creating a "simple" packer is not really hard, people who are interested in


that topic will be able to code one for themselves to.


  • Like 1
Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...