[VB].Net or VB, which has less chance of being decompiled?

**mcquiggd** · 25 September 2006, 20:23

Depends who wrote it. If it was offshored, you could have the source and still not make any sense of it.

**DimPrawn** · 25 September 2006, 20:24

VB6 compiled to native code is far harder to decompile than VB.NET (or any .NET language)

Obfuscation of VB.NET assemblies can help. Please see http://www.howtoselectguides.com/dotnet/obfuscators/ and choose a good one.

A VB6 exe/dll compiled to native code is still at least 10x harder to decompile than even the most obfuscated .NET assembly.

**TheMonkey** · 25 September 2006, 20:35

I always wondered if you could pack an EXE in MSIL using UPX. Anyone tried that?

**DimPrawn** · 25 September 2006, 20:40

No, because I have no idea what you are talking about.

**TheMonkey** · 25 September 2006, 20:57

Google google google....

http://upx.sourceforge.net/

**thunderlizard** · 25 September 2006, 21:53

VB6 I'd have thought. Any dotnetter worthy of the name will be able to read IL, then simultaneously translate it into VB with his left hand and C# with his right.

**TheMonkey** · 25 September 2006, 22:58

Originally posted by thunderlizard

VB6 I'd have thought. Any dotnetter worthy of the name will be able to read IL, then simultaneously translate it into VB with his left hand and C# with his right.

Or just download reflector to do it for you ....

**MarillionFan** · 26 September 2006, 08:17

I always thought you couldnt decode very easily. Couple of good links to prove me wrong please (for VB that is)

**DimPrawn** · 26 September 2006, 08:28

You cannot decode VB6 compiled to native code easily. If it is compiled to p-code it is much easier.

Anyone who says they can recover the source (in anything approaching the original) of a compiled (to native) VB6 program is talking bollox.

[VB].Net or VB, which has less chance of being decompiled?