Obfuscation - optimisation?

Martin Egholm Nielsen martin@egholm-nielsen.dk
Thu Nov 25 09:11:00 GMT 2004

>>> "TheA clue is in the bit of my post you snipped.
> http://proguard.sourceforge.net/

>> In any event, this description ignores the main point of 
>> obfuscation is not to reduce program size, but to make a reverse 
>> compile of the program more difficult to read.
Well, that may be because my subject was a bit misleading - but it _did_ 
contain the word "optimisation". And ProGuard does see it self as much 
as an optimiser as an obfuscator:

"It can then optimize bytecode and remove unused instructions. Finally, 
it can rename the..." <SNIP>

> Perhaps, but that's not the goal of the original poster.

However, I do have a hidden agenda involving obfuscation :-) Because I 
have some client-software which is to be obfuscated - namely in order to 
prevent reverse-engineering. And part of the communication between the 
client and server is done using serialisation. And as far as I can 
imagine, the deserialisation does only work if the deserialised class is 
"equal" on both sides - hence both versions must be compiled from the 
same obfuscated class, right?!

Best regards,

More information about the Java mailing list