[logback-user] Substituting class/method names in logback log files with original names when deploying obfuscated code

[Christopher BROWN]

Hello Chris,

I do indeed realise this.  The primary reason for obfuscation here is to
shorten the names of symbols to make file sizes smaller (and additionally,
some people claim better performance due to faster lookup but I don't think
that makes much difference).

However some customers have asked for the obfuscation for security reasons:
we have pointed out as you did that it's a bit pointless, but the argument
is that they'd like it anyway as a means of making it more difficult (even
if not impossible).  And in any case, all obfuscation is always about
making it difficult without ever achieving total security, because at some
point the CPU has to do something intelligent :-)

We'd probably end up doing some encryption of the mapping file, but again,
it's like licence keys: difficult but not impossible.

Thanks,
Christopher


On 28 November 2011 17:50, Chris Pratt <thechrispratt at gmail.com> wrote:

> You do realize that if you supply the mapping file to the end user, there
> is really no reason to obfuscale the code in the first place.  They'll have
> everything they need to properly un-obfuscate and decompile it.
>   (*Chris*)
> On Nov 28, 2011 7:32 AM, "Christopher BROWN" <brown at reflexe.fr> wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> What would be the best way to handle logging with logback when deploying
>> obfuscated code?
>>
>> For example, with YGuard, when the obfuscator runs, it outputs a mapping
>> file of obfuscated code (class names, method names, etc) to unobfuscated
>> code.  When a stacktrace or just any logging trace is output, the
>> class/method names are obviously obfuscated.  As it's possible to deploy
>> this mapping with the code, say embedded in the same ".jar", all the
>> information I would need is available.
>>
>> Without too much re-writing of code (default formatting with logback),
>> what would be the best way to dynamically replace matching class/method
>> names?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Christopher
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Logback-user mailing list
>> Logback-user at qos.ch
>> http://mailman.qos.ch/mailman/listinfo/logback-user
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Logback-user mailing list
> Logback-user at qos.ch
> http://mailman.qos.ch/mailman/listinfo/logback-user
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.qos.ch/pipermail/logback-user/attachments/20111128/dfd5e3d9/attachment.html>