I have been working on a project alone for more than two years for a company. The project is a really big one using rxtx to communicate with a hardware device. I used Java 8 and JAVAFX for the UI. Now it is almost finished and I am starting to search how to deliver the end user application that the company will distribute over its clients.
The problem is that the company I am working with wants the code to be non reachable when the software is between final clients hands because the Java code contains some extremely sensitive information that could have very bad consequences for the company if final clients happened to know them. The clients can literally perform actions they don’t have the right to perform.
So after searching (a lot) and thinking relatively to my case, I understood that giving a JAR obfuscated isn’t the solution. I then tried to generate a JAR and then transform it to an EXE but all I succeeded on was wrapping the JAR into EXE which does not prevent extracting the JAR and then seeing all the code easily. Finally, I found that I should use AoT compilation like GCJ compiler to produce native binary exe from my Java code but here I am stuck because after watching videos and reading articles etc I didn’t manage to find a clear way to produce the native binary exe.
I am now confused since I don’t know if I am on the right path and good direction or if I am totally wrong and there is another way of protecting the code (at least from non professional hackers, I understand that it is not possible to make it 100% safe but I am just searching for a reasonable and good way). How should I manage this final step of my work?
I currently work for a company that has code that we don't want anyone to have access to for the security of our clients and-- less important-- for legal reasons. ;-)
One possible solution you could look into would be to rewrite the code you deem most sensitive into a C/C++ library. It would be possible to compile this into a .so/.dll/.dylib file for the respective OSs and it would make it difficult, not entirely impossible, but difficult to decompile.
The trouble would come from learning how to access native code from Java as much of the documentation is not helpful or just simply nonexistent. This would utilize the Java Native Interface (JNI) which allows Java to, well, interface with the native (compiled C/C++) code. This would make it possible to create a Jar file that would effectively become a Java library for you to access throughout the rest of your project. The native code, however will still need to be loaded at runtime, but that's apart of learning how JNI works. A helpful link I found for JNI is http://jnicookbook.owsiak.org/ (for as long as it's still a functional link).
One of our clients here where I work has a project written in Java and needed to implement our code that is unfortunately all written in C. So we needed a way to access this C/C++ code from Java. This is the way we went about solving this issue without rewriting our code in Java. But we had the benefit (?) of having already written our code in C.
This solution to write a bunch of extra code last minute in another language that I may or may not be familiar with doesn't sound like particularly fun time.
I would be curious to learn what possible problems others might see with this solution.
This question already has answers here:
Closed 10 years ago.
Possible Duplicate:
Do you obfuscate your commercial Java code?
Is there any way other then obfuscation to protect jars from being opened by someone else? The thing is that I don't want anyone to access the code, which is why I don't prefer Java. From the decompilers I used, programs made in C# and Java have EVERYTHING like the names of the variables intact which would make it easy to get access to programs that are not free. Worse, give out the source code.
Most of these points are covered by comments above, but I'll expand on them a bit here:
If your code is running on the user's machine, the user can decompile your code. It doesn't matter what language it is. Java, C, whitespace, brainfuck, it doesn't matter. If the code runs on a computer, a human can read it. Even if you make your own homebrew language and compiler, the compiled code is still going to be a sequence of standard machine instructions, which decompilers will handily turn into readable code in C or whatever language you like.
No exceptions. Forget about it.
But there are ways to get what you want: protecting some secret business logic. An easy way to do this would be to place the business logic on your own machine and expose it with a web service. The user can still see the client requests and service responses but otherwise your logic is a black box.
You could also make your own machines, lock them down, and distribute them to users. Be aware that although this is possible, it's technically quite difficult to do correctly (think of all the hacked gaming consoles and smartphones), and will significantly increase the cost of your service.
As far as I know, jar files (generated with NetBeans) may contain only .class files, which are Java bitecode, not source code. I don't know if there's a way to reverse-engineer a .class file, but it has very little ASCII usable text.
I'm aiming to create a new file extension (possibly more than one) for a program I'm creating. So, after looking around for a bit, I found a number of sources on the subject, listed below, just in case anyone wants to look at them and get the general idea of what I have been looking at.
Utilising a file association in a Java application
Create registry entry to associate file extension with application in C++
Associating file extensions with a program
http://support.microsoft.com/?scid=kb%3Ben-us%3B185453&x=6&y=11
http://www.rgagnon.com/javadetails/java-0592.html
http://www.rgagnon.com/javadetails/java-0480.html
Also, note that the Microsoft support one is actually a Visual Basic lesson, but I was just trying to see if there were any similarities in the registry changing.
Most of them generally talk about doing some registry editing so that Windows can recognize the new file and know what to do with it. Then I stumbled upon this document by Oracle, which claims that you are able to do all of the above with some (seemingly) simple Java code. I figure if it's that easy, though, somebody would have pointed it out already. Also, that document is from 2006. I've got a number of questions, which I understand can be a lot to go through, so if anyone takes time out to answer this, thanks a bunch!
What's really the best way to go about creating and associating a file type for a Java program?
If the Oracle method is used, is it done in a completely separate program? I would assume you don't want the file type being created and associated every time the program runs, and from what I've seen, that will actually return errors.
I want other people (only Windows users) to be able to easily install the program, but I'm on Windows 7 64-bit. Are there any changes I should be aware of to make the association also compatible with 32-bit systems?
Are the changes easily and completely reversible with either method (i.e. if I just wanted to create a test file extension)?
I couldn't find any extensive sources on teaching how to do this kind of stuff with no previous knowledge of it, so if anyone can't answer my questions, but does have a good source I can look at, that would be nice, too.
Java Web Start is not only a freely available installer that comes from Oracle, but it will also register an apps. interest in file types. See the File service demo. for an example.
I'm really confused - but really it's pretty wierd because I know two programming langauges but I can't figure out something simple like this...
I've been looking for ages but I can't seem to get my head around it.
You See, for a long time I've been writting in AutoIt, and I've written two programs in it that are due to go on sale soon! They were never meant to be out for a long time though (kind of like Windows Vista), so lately I've been learning Java with success. I've wrote a few very very simple applications in eclipse while going through Java tutorials! I'm now ready to transfer my programs to Java, to gain me a wider market due to Java's cross-platform ability, but I never anticipated distribution to be this complex.
My first problem I have come across is ease of use on multiple OS's: I don't want my customers to have to deal with JRE or multiple files, I need a double click solution that will work on MAC, Windows, Linux, etc so that even complete computer newbie's can launch my software! Secondly, this is not as much a problem as something I am not sure how to do. This is including files in my software package some need to stay seperate from the program but others could be compiled, but actually I suppose this can be worked around by an installer - which would probably be easier! And finally the other proram I made is stand - alone so it can work on USB sticks (which what it was designed for), now, how do you suppose I do this so it will launch on multiple opearating systems when it's plugged in without any hasle?
Update :: Forgot to add :: My concerns about security
I have read and from personal experience I know: how easy it is to decompile a .jar, and if there not protected properly read the source code! I know about obfuscation and I know I'll have legal back up but it just worries me. Even from the point of view that user may get the wrong first impretion of my software.
So to conclude in one sentace (Please read above still):
I need to be able to let people use my software written in Java by double clicking e.g. Like something made in AutoIt - a standard application i.e *.exe
Thanks in advance
There are two routes you can take without needing any extra software involved.
The first is to just make an executable jar (Java Archive) file. Java automatically associates the .jar extension with the Java interpreter on most systems. The JAR's manifest file will tell it which class to launch when you double-click it.
The second, less recommended route, is to make a Java Web Start application, with a JNLP launcher file. The is aimed more at applications distributed from web sites.
I'll suggest the third way: write several platform-specific launch scripts for your application. For example, run.bat for Windows and run.sh for Linux. Inside every script write a command to run JRE with all the necessary parameters. You can also maintain some pre-launch checks (is JRE installed?) or some platform-specific actions in this scripts.
Is there a way to deploy a Java program in a format that is not reverse-engineerable?
I know how to convert my application into an executable JAR file, but I want to make sure that the code cannot be reverse engineered, or at least, not easily.
Obfuscation of the source code doesn't count... it makes it harder to understand the code, but does not hide it.
A related question is How to lock compiled Java classes to prevent decompilation?
Once I've completed the program, I would still have access to the original source, so maintaining the application would not be the problem. If the application is distributed, I would not want any of the users to be able to decompile it. Obfuscation does not achieve this as the users would still be able to decompile it, and while they would have difficulty following the action flows, they would be able to see the code, and potentially take information out of it.
What I'm concerned about is if there is any information in the code relating to remote access. There is a host to which the application connects using a user-id and password provided by the user. Is there a way to hide the host's address from the user, if that address is located inside the source code?
The short answer is "No, it does not exist".
Reverse engineering is a process that does not imply to look at the code at all. It's basically trying to understand the underlying mechanisms and then mimic them. For example, that's how JScript appears from MS labs, by copying Netscape's JavaScript behavior, without having access to the code. The copy was so perfect that even the bugs were copied.
You could obfuscate your JAR file with YGuard. It doesn't obfuscate your source code, but the compiled classes, so there is no problem about maintaining the code later.
If you want to hide some string, you could encrypt it, making it harder to get it through looking at the source code (it is even better if you obfuscate the JAR file).
If you know which platforms you are targeting, get something that compiles your Java into native code, such as Excelsior JET or GCJ.
Short of that, you're never going to be able to hide the source code, since the user always has your bytecode and can Jad it.
You're writing in a language that has introspection as part of the core language. It generates .class files whose specifications are widely known (thus enabling other vendors to produce clean-room implementations of Java compilers and interpreters).
This means there are publicly-available decompilers. All it takes is a few Google searches, and you have some Java code that does the same thing as yours. Just without the comments, and some of the variable names (but the function names stay the same).
Really, obfuscation is about all you can get (though the decompiled code will already be slightly obfuscated) without going to C or some other fully-compiled language, anyway.
Don't use an interpreted language? What are you trying to protect anyway? If it's valuable enough, anything can be reverse engineered. The chances of someone caring enough to reverse engineer most projects is minimal. Obfuscation provides at least a minimal hurdle.
Ensure that your intellectual property (IP) is protected via other mechanisms. Particularly for security code, it's important that people be able to inspect implementations, so that the security is in the algorithm, not in the source.
I'm tempted to ask why you'd want to do this, but I'll leave that alone...
The problem I see is that the JVM, like the CLR, needs to be able to intrepert you code in order to JIT compile and run it. You can make it more "complex" but given that the spec for bytecode is rather well documented, and exists at a much higher level than something like the x86 assembler spec, it's unlikely you can "hide" the process-flow, since it's got to be there for the program to work in the first place.
Make it into a web service. Then you are the only one that can see the source code.
It can't be done.
Anything that can be compiled can be de-compiled. The very best you can do is obfuscate the hell out of it.
That being said, there is some interesting stuff happening in Quantum Cryptography. Essentially, any attempt to read the message changes it. I don't know if this could be applied to source code or not.
Even if you compile the code into native machine language, there are all sorts of programs that let you essentially decompile it into assembly language and follow the process flow (OlyDbg, IDA Pro).
It can not be done. This is not a Java problem. Any language that can be compiled can be decompiled for Java, it's just easier.
You are trying to show somebody a picture without actually showing them. It is not possible. You also can not hide your host even if you hide at the application level. Someone can still grap it via Wireshark or any other network sniffer.
As someone said above, reverse engineering could always decompile your executable. The only way to protect your source code(or algorithm) is not to distribute your executable.
separate your application into a server code and a client app, hide the important part of your algorithm in your server code and run it in a cloud server, just distribute the client code which works only as a data getter and senter.
By this even your client code is decompiled. You are not losing anything.
But for sure this will decrease the performance and user convenience.
I think this may not be the answer you are looking for, but just to raise different idea of protecting source code.
With anything interpreted at some point it has to be processed "in the clear". The string would show up clear as day once the code is run through JAD. You could deploy an encryption key with your app or do a basic ceasar cipher to encrypt the host connect info and decrypt at runtime...
But at some point during processing the host connection information must be put in the clear in order for your app to connect to the host...
So you could statically hide it, but you can't hide it during runtime if they running a debugger
This is impossible. The CPU will have to execute your program, i.e. your program must be in a format that a CPU can understand. CPUs are much dumber than humans. Ergo, if a CPU can understand your program, a human can.
Having concerns about concealing the code, I'd run ProGuard anyway.