adplus-dvertising
frame-decoration

Question

What is the objective of advanced obfuscating transformations?

a.

To completely prevent decompilation of .NET code.

b.

To slow down determined reversers.

c.

To make the decompiled output more readable.

d.

To dramatically reduce the readability of the decompiled output to the point where it is no longer useful to reversers.

Posted under Reverse Engineering

Answer: (d).To dramatically reduce the readability of the decompiled output to the point where it is no longer useful to reversers. Explanation:The objective of advanced obfuscating transformations is to dramatically reduce the readability of the decompiled output to the point where it is no longer useful to reversers.

Engage with the Community - Add Your Comment

Confused About the Answer? Ask for Details Here.

Know the Explanation? Add it Here.

Q. What is the objective of advanced obfuscating transformations?

Similar Questions

Discover Related MCQs

Q. What is one potential strategy for creating more powerful obfuscators?

Q. What is the limited effect of obfuscators?

Q. What makes .NET code more vulnerable to reverse engineering compared to other processor architectures?

Q. Why should you always obfuscate a program before passing it through an encryption-based packer like Remotesoft Protector?

Q. Why is the decryption process of an assembly generated by Protector quite simple?

Q. What is the process required to reverse engineer an assembly generated by Protector?

Q. What is the typical limitation of any code encryption technique?

Q. Why is obfuscation considered to be a stronger protection method than encryption?

Q. What is the major weakness of encrypting IL code in assemblies?

Q. What is the best way to prevent people from reverse engineering .NET assemblies?

Q. What is the encryption algorithm used by Protector to encrypt the IL code?

Q. What hashing algorithm is used by Protector to create the key for encrypting the IL code?

Q. Is the encrypted IL code 100 percent platform-independent?

Q. What is the role of the native redistributable DLL included in Protector's encrypted assemblies?

Q. What is the alternative option offered by Protector for those not willing to sacrifice portability for security?

Q. Can precompiling your assemblies protect a tiny method that contains your precious algorithm?

Q. Is it difficult to reverse engineer native code?

Q. What is the potential vulnerability of precompiled assemblies?

Q. Why is native code less readable than IL code?

Q. What is the best way to prevent reverse engineering of .NET assemblies?