[C#]Making a DLL Unaccessible By Unwanted Access

[xSilv3rbullet]

So I'm making a library right now, but I'm gonna have to include it with my program.

However, I don't want people to be able to use the methods inside of the DLL.

How do I do this?
O_O

[MentaL]

[jMerliN]

So I'm making a library right now, but I'm gonna have to include it with my program.

However, I don't want people to be able to use the methods inside of the DLL.

How do I do this?
O_O

There are a N + 1 ways, the simplest is to use ordinals because it throws off what the exported functions really do.

Other ways are much more complex but much more effective, etc. A common one is to make 1 export but only pass a bunch of callbacks through, etc.

I digress, however, that since your stuff is C#, if someone wants to know something, they'll just decompile it. Hf.

[TheAJ]

use the "protected internal" modifier. This allows access only to what's within the assembly:

public class Foo
{
    protected internal void DoSomething()
    {
        ...
    }
}

Eg:
namespace = Assembly1 = allowed
namespace = Assembly1.Sub = allowed
namespace = Assembly2 = denied

Unless i did not yet what your meaning?

[xSilv3rbullet]

use the "protected internal" modifier. This allows access only to what's within the assembly:

public class Foo
{
    protected internal void DoSomething()
    {
        ...
    }
}

Eg:
namespace = Assembly1 = allowed
namespace = Assembly1.Sub = allowed
namespace = Assembly2 = denied

Unless i did not yet what your meaning?

What I'm trying to do is to prevent unwanted access to methods and such in my library.

I've already done something like

public Foo(string password, int id, int header, string body)
{
//Code that I'm too lazy to add here. :P  But hashes the passwords and stuff and compares them to what they should be
}

---------- Post added at 07:31 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:30 PM ----------

There are a N + 1 ways, the simplest is to use ordinals because it throws off what the exported functions really do.

Other ways are much more complex but much more effective, etc. A common one is to make 1 export but only pass a bunch of callbacks through, etc.

I digress, however, that since your stuff is C#, if someone wants to know something, they'll just decompile it. Hf.

C# can't be decompiled...or can it?
I read an article how the most decompilers do is take the EXE and spit out ASM.

[TheAJ]

What I'm trying to do is to prevent unwanted access to methods and such in my library.

I've already done something like

public Foo(string password, int id, int header, string body)
{
//Code that I'm too lazy to add here. :P  But hashes the passwords and stuff and compares them to what they should be
}

... yeah this disallows access from without the assembly (library, console, form, etc)

[Team Zebra]

You were probably reading about C/C++ decompilers. C# isn't a native language, it's compiled into MSIL (Microsoft's answer to Java bytecode). It can be decompiled to near-perfect source code.

[zolamu]

pack with themida
and make some password to get library working

[Nillus]

You can go with the 'internal' keyword, but I would also use Xenocode Postbuild or SmartAssembly on top of it against decompilers. Those applications obfuscate all related assemblies (so executables and libraries), but in such a way that they can still communicate. They are being informed about changed method names etc. The program also removes the CLI header so apps like Reflector cant even see the obfuscated code at all.
Posted via Mobile Device