I broke the obfuscator :(

[Morthawt]

#Region ;**** Directives created by AutoIt3Wrapper_GUI ****
#AutoIt3Wrapper_Run_Obfuscator=y
#EndRegion ;**** Directives created by AutoIt3Wrapper_GUI ****
$tester = Tester
$tester()

Func Tester()
    MsgBox(0, 0, FuncName($tester))
EndFunc   ;==>Tester

This works fine if you run it in scite editor, however if you compile it, you get an error "Unknown function name". I figured since functions are all renamed it would be interesting to have the program show the current (obfuscated) name of the function the message box is running in, but when I try and use a variablized function while obfuscated it just crashes.

[Jos]

Obfuscator is not handling the new >3.3.9.x syntax for obfuscation.

Jos

[Morthawt]

Ah, I guess I need to wait for an update then. I figured I would give it a test drive since apparently this new change to functions is supposed to not cause as many issues for obfuscation.

[Jos]

I currently have no plans to support this new functionality in obfuscator other than the /striponly functionality of obfuscator.

Jos

[Morthawt]

I find that a bit strange considering on Melba23's post:  they mentioned one of the benefits basically is that it will not cause issues for the obfuscator and gave an example. I just took his exact example of the better newer way of doing it and tried to obfuscate it and had the same issue I had with my basic test script. Surely new functionality should be accommodated for with the obfuscator? Because otherwise not only would the obfuscator be useless with the new coding features, it would basically make the updates to Autoit's language pointless because if you adopt the new additions to your coding you can never protect your code like you could before.

[jchd]

The obfuscation doesn't protect code.

Then I read much of "should" and "would", but please realize that noone here, DEVs & JON included, owe you anything.

[Melba23]

Morthawt,

 

Surely new functionality should be accommodated for with the obfuscator?

What an arrogant attitude!

Jos maintains Obfuscator and it is completely separate from AutoIt proper. It is entirely up to him, and him alone, to decide whether he is prepared to update it to meet any changes in AutoIt. I would point out that Jos has previously said that Obfuscator in its current form may well soon become deprecated and only certain functionalities retained for future versions - as was hinted at in his reply above.

As to my remark, it related to the "StripOnly" function of Obfuscator (which is the only part I ever use) and the understandable problem it has with Call - which is avoided by using the new syntax.

M23

[Morthawt]

I apologise if I came off as arrogant to you, I am just saying since I installed Autoit and Scite editor I would think that everything it comes with is compatible with all the new technology in the language, thats all. I did not know anything was "separate".

[Jos]

Anything that comes with the separate SciTE4AutoIt3 installer is separate.

Jos

[Morthawt]

Thanks. I am trying to figure out if there is any manual way I can tweak the obfuscated code to fix that one error. I think all it would take is changing the $var = ThisFunctionName and replacing it with what ever the obfuscator's random name has replaced ThisFunctionName but I, obviously, have no clue what the new name is lol and for decent sized scripts you would be there till the end of time if that is the only non-automatic way.

[Morthawt]

This is my work around:

#Region ;**** Directives created by AutoIt3Wrapper_GUI ****
#AutoIt3Wrapper_Run_Obfuscator=y
#EndRegion ;**** Directives created by AutoIt3Wrapper_GUI ****
$originalname = FunctionHere
$originalname()
Func FunctionHere($FuncName = 'Func:FunctionHere')
    MsgBox(0,0, FuncName($originalname))
EndFunc   ;==>FunctionHere

Before you obfuscate, any functions that you are calling via a variable, add an optional parameter at the end of the function that defines the original name of the function, as shown in the example above for the function called FunctionHere and then compile your obfuscated source bypassing all errors. Then edit the post-obfuscation source file that was created and find the untouched statements like $A2700202217 = FunctionHere and do a search for that FunctionHere part and find the original name from the optional parameter. Then rename the FunctionHere part from the $A2700202217 = FunctionHere part and remove the optional parameter that has the name of the function. Then compile the obfuscated source with no further changes and the compiled exe works fine in my test.

[Jos]

What about adding this line to your original script? Does that work?

#ignorefunc tester

Jos

[Morthawt]

What about adding this line to your original script? Does that work?

#ignorefunc tester

Jos

In the sense of letting the script work yes it does work, however the function name is unaltered and would then just need a manual search/replace of the function names with something similarly random as what the obfuscator would produce.

[Jos]

In the sense of letting the script work yes it does work, however the function name is unaltered and would then just need a manual search/replace of the function names with something similarly random as what the obfuscator would produce.

.. and your point is? security or something?

[Morthawt]

Well in terms of preserving the same randomness that is performed elsewhere, you would have to then just copy the name of the unchanged function name and replace it everywhere in the script in one go with some randomness, thats it.

Edited December 30, 2013 by Morthawt

[Jos]

I seriously think you have a false sense of source protection with Obuscator. All it does is make your script pretty unreadable but let it be clear that it is possible to make it reasonable readable again. Agree you can't restore the original FuncNames and VarNames... but that is it, the reset can be undone.

Jos

[Morthawt]

I know what obfuscation is and while most of the time I do not use it I do use it for some situations.

[Jos]

Please give the current Beta version a try. It should now both support /StripOnly and Obfuscation for this way of Func notations, as both functions are using the same functionality in the program.

 

Jos

Edited December 31, 2013 by Jos

[Morthawt]

Flawless. That works perfectly on my test example. No manual tweaks needed.