反混淆 反编译 .net

反混淆 反编译

Sergio Pereira asked a great question in the comments that I wanted to bring out to a full blown post.  He said:

塞尔吉奥·佩雷拉(Sergio Pereira)在我想发表在完整文章上的评论中问了一个很大的问题。 他说：

I'm with you on not touching if it works. As a regular user of Reflector I constantly find myself struggling with the moral issues of what I'm doing. Do you consider what you just did a violation of Intellectual Property ?

我与您保持联系，如果它有效。 作为Reflector的常规用户，我不断发现自己在做自己的工作时遇到道德问题。 您认为您刚刚侵犯了知识产权吗？

This is a great question and a slippery slope.  Here's some brainstorming and thoughts to get a discussion started.

这是一个很大的问题，而且坡滑。 这里有些头脑风暴和想法，以开始讨论。

To start, I didn't simply "decompile and copy-paste," not only is that shady (not to mention technically infeasible) but it wasn't my intent.  My intent was to get the 'gist' of what is going on inside of ASP.NET's @Page Directive validateInput. 

首先，我并不是简单地“反编译并复制粘贴”，这不仅是可疑的(更不用说在技术上不可行)，而且这也不是我的意图。 我的目的是了解ASP.NET的@Page Directive validateInput内部发生的事情的“要点”。

Some folks could argue that using ILDASM to get the 'gist' of something is stealing intellectual property.  I believe that is usually true.  On the other hand I believe that Microsoft included ILDASM (and provides rich metadata in .NET and didn't obfuscate System.*) and wants us to understand the gist of the Windows .NET Framework.  They also have provided Rotor source code which many people, including myself, use as a reference implementation to get the 'gist/zen/gestalt' of .NET. 

有些人可能会争辩说，使用ILDASM来获取某物的“要旨”是在窃取知识产权。 我相信通常是这样。 另一方面，我认为Microsoft包含ILDASM(并且在.NET中提供了丰富的元数据，并且不会混淆System。*)，并且希望我们了解Windows .NET Framework的要旨。 他们还提供了Rotor源代码，包括我本人在内的许多人都将其用作获取.NET的“要旨/禅宗/格式塔”的参考实现。

So, what is appropriate use of ILDASM?  If someone ILDASMed the System.Collections and writes a better Dictionary, is that a gray area?  Who first thought up Dictionaries? Do I owe someone royalties?  We all look at other code, other libraries, and internal headers to get the 'gist.' 

那么，ILDASM的适当用法是什么？ 如果有人ILDASM对System.Collections进行了编写并编写了更好的Dictionary，那是灰色区域吗？ 谁首先想到字典？ 我应该欠某人版税吗？ 我们都会查看其他代码，其他库和内部标头来获得“要点”。

However, I'm not going to use this code until I'm satisified that it is righteous.  Perhaps I'll write an MSDN Article on the subject of Cross Site Scripting and this backport.  Perhaps it will be useful and released as a sample, perhaps it will be quashed, perhaps it will be my own personal unused curiousity. Any thoughts ScottGu?

但是，除非我对它是对的感到满意，否则我不会使用此代码。 也许我会写一篇关于跨站点脚本和反向移植的MSDN文章。 也许它将有用并作为示例发布，也许它将被废除，也许这将是我个人未使用的好奇心。 有什么想法ScottGu吗？

翻译自:

反混淆 反编译