obfuscator problem

  • Thread starter Jason
  • Start date Views 2,237
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

Jason

Can anyone recommend a obfuscator?

We tried Xenocode postbuild but got an error: "This assembly is not strong

name signed." Looks like the message came out of the RunCaspolCommand method

in the CaspolSecurityPolicyCreator.cs of the SetSecurity project.

Can Dotfuscator handle addin and the security challenge?
 
K

Ken Slovak - [MVP - Outlook]

Any time you obfuscate you must delay sign your assembly and actually sign

it with that SNK or PFX after the obfuscation. Otherwise the

signature/strong naming is also obfuscated along with your code.

"Jason" <a@a.com> wrote in message

news:OmOO8w7tJHA.5452@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> Can anyone recommend a obfuscator?

> We tried Xenocode postbuild but got an error: "This assembly is not strong
> name signed." Looks like the message came out of the RunCaspolCommand
> method in the CaspolSecurityPolicyCreator.cs of the SetSecurity project.

> Can Dotfuscator handle addin and the security challenge?

>
 
J

Jason

Same problem: xxx.dll does not represent a strongly named assembly

Here is what we did:

1. checked "Delay Sign only" while kept "Sign the assembly" check

2. built, got UnsignedAddin.dll

3. ran Outlook, add-in cannot load

4. manualy sign from commoand line OK: ran sn -R unsignedAddin.dll

keyfile.pfx

5. ran Outlook, addin loaded OK.

6. built again

7. obfuscate the UnsignedAddin.dll =>ObfuscatedUnsignedAddin.dll

8. ran sn -R ObfuscatedUnsignedAddin.dll keyfile.pfx

Got error message: obfuscatedUnsignedAddin.dll does not represent a strongly

named assembly
<kenslovak@mvps.org> wrote in message

news:u%23uSfKFuJHA.4444@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> Any time you obfuscate you must delay sign your assembly and actually sign
> it with that SNK or PFX after the obfuscation. Otherwise the
> signature/strong naming is also obfuscated along with your code.

> >

>

> "Jason" <a@a.com> wrote in message
> news:OmOO8w7tJHA.5452@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> > Can anyone recommend a obfuscator?
>

>> We tried Xenocode postbuild but got an error: "This assembly is not
> > strong name signed." Looks like the message came out of the
> > RunCaspolCommand method in the CaspolSecurityPolicyCreator.cs of the
> > SetSecurity project.
>

>> Can Dotfuscator handle addin and the security challenge?
>

>>

>
 
J

Jason

I chekced the article "Giving a .NET Assembly a Strong Name" at

http://www.codeguru.com/columns/experts/print.php/c4643. My procedure was

right.

I then used Dotfuscator Community Edition (not support Office addin) against

a C# console exe, following the same procedure. It worked. Look like

Xenocode postbuild broke the strong name.

What obfuscator do your guys use? How much $?

"Jason" <a@a.com> wrote in message

news:OgRkSYLuJHA.1304@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Same problem: xxx.dll does not represent a strongly named assembly

> Here is what we did:

> 1. checked "Delay Sign only" while kept "Sign the assembly" check
> 2. built, got UnsignedAddin.dll
> 3. ran Outlook, add-in cannot load
> 4. manualy sign from commoand line OK: ran sn -R unsignedAddin.dll
> keyfile.pfx
> 5. ran Outlook, addin loaded OK.

> 6. built again
> 7. obfuscate the UnsignedAddin.dll =>ObfuscatedUnsignedAddin.dll
> 8. ran sn -R ObfuscatedUnsignedAddin.dll keyfile.pfx
> Got error message: obfuscatedUnsignedAddin.dll does not represent a
> strongly named assembly

> " - " <kenslovak@mvps.org> wrote in message
> news:u%23uSfKFuJHA.4444@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> > Any time you obfuscate you must delay sign your assembly and actually
> > sign it with that SNK or PFX after the obfuscation. Otherwise the
> > signature/strong naming is also obfuscated along with your code.
>

>> > >

> >

>

>
>
>
>
>
>> "Jason" <a@a.com> wrote in message
> > news:OmOO8w7tJHA.5452@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> >> Can anyone recommend a obfuscator?
> >
>>> We tried Xenocode postbuild but got an error: "This assembly is not
> >> strong name signed." Looks like the message came out of the
> >> RunCaspolCommand method in the CaspolSecurityPolicyCreator.cs of the
> >> SetSecurity project.
> >
>>> Can Dotfuscator handle addin and the security challenge?
> >
>>>

> >


>
 
K

Ken Slovak - [MVP - Outlook]

I rarely obfuscate any of my code, usually I just hand it over to the

customer and they take care of that since they'll be using their own

certificate to sign the code and not mine. On the rare occasions I've

obfuscated my code I've used the full edition of Dotfuscator.

That article looks right, one thing to try would be if you try using an SNK

file instead of your PFX and using that in your post-obfuscation signing

call.

"Jason" <a@a.com> wrote in message

news:%23z$708LuJHA.1240@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> I chekced the article "Giving a .NET Assembly a Strong Name" at
> http://www.codeguru.com/columns/experts/print.php/c4643. My procedure was
> right.

> I then used Dotfuscator Community Edition (not support Office addin)
> against a C# console exe, following the same procedure. It worked. Look
> like Xenocode postbuild broke the strong name.

> What obfuscator do your guys use? How much $?

> "Jason" <a@a.com> wrote in message
> news:OgRkSYLuJHA.1304@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> > Same problem: xxx.dll does not represent a strongly named assembly
>

>> Here is what we did:
>

>> 1. checked "Delay Sign only" while kept "Sign the assembly" check
> > 2. built, got UnsignedAddin.dll
> > 3. ran Outlook, add-in cannot load
> > 4. manualy sign from commoand line OK: ran sn -R unsignedAddin.dll
> > keyfile.pfx
> > 5. ran Outlook, addin loaded OK.
>

>> 6. built again
> > 7. obfuscate the UnsignedAddin.dll =>ObfuscatedUnsignedAddin.dll
> > 8. ran sn -R ObfuscatedUnsignedAddin.dll keyfile.pfx
> > Got error message: obfuscatedUnsignedAddin.dll does not represent a
> > strongly named assembly
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top