<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Multiple Updates	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://ntcore.com/multiple-update/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://ntcore.com/multiple-update/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 27 Mar 2009 10:52:17 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Daniel Pistelli		</title>
		<link>https://ntcore.com/multiple-update/#comment-155</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Daniel Pistelli]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Mar 2009 10:52:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rcecafe.net/?p=77#comment-155</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Sorry, but I don&#039;t see the point in protecting something which stores it source code on the local machine. 
Or is the source code outside, gets compiled and then downloaded on the local machine?
In that case, the only thing, again, which can cause problems is name obfuscation and you can&#039;t use a packer on dlls.
Just use an obfuscator without name obfuscation and you won&#039;t have problems.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sorry, but I don&#8217;t see the point in protecting something which stores it source code on the local machine.<br />
Or is the source code outside, gets compiled and then downloaded on the local machine?<br />
In that case, the only thing, again, which can cause problems is name obfuscation and you can&#8217;t use a packer on dlls.<br />
Just use an obfuscator without name obfuscation and you won&#8217;t have problems.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Jens		</title>
		<link>https://ntcore.com/multiple-update/#comment-154</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jens]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Mar 2009 08:06:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rcecafe.net/?p=77#comment-154</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Thx Daniel.

Actually we spoke about it and the situation is that

a) Exe gets compiled at startup and runs
b) Parts of the exe are compiled when accessed through the already started exe

We just saw that we also use reflections, so the problem is the &quot;extra&quot; code that gets compiled when the exe is already compiled/started.

Thx,
Jens]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thx Daniel.</p>
<p>Actually we spoke about it and the situation is that</p>
<p>a) Exe gets compiled at startup and runs<br />
b) Parts of the exe are compiled when accessed through the already started exe</p>
<p>We just saw that we also use reflections, so the problem is the &#8220;extra&#8221; code that gets compiled when the exe is already compiled/started.</p>
<p>Thx,<br />
Jens</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Daniel Pistelli		</title>
		<link>https://ntcore.com/multiple-update/#comment-153</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Daniel Pistelli]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Mar 2009 22:34:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rcecafe.net/?p=77#comment-153</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Well, runtime code generation in .net is achieved through reflection. Thus, the method I tould you should be a valid one to detect if an assembly uses reflection.

Speaking of packers, runtime code generation doesn&#039;t conflict with them, since .net packers only extract the original assembly in memory.

Obfuscators on the other hand could create problems, because of name obfuscation. Just disable name obfuscation and you won&#039;t have problems with reflection.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well, runtime code generation in .net is achieved through reflection. Thus, the method I tould you should be a valid one to detect if an assembly uses reflection.</p>
<p>Speaking of packers, runtime code generation doesn&#8217;t conflict with them, since .net packers only extract the original assembly in memory.</p>
<p>Obfuscators on the other hand could create problems, because of name obfuscation. Just disable name obfuscation and you won&#8217;t have problems with reflection.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Jens		</title>
		<link>https://ntcore.com/multiple-update/#comment-152</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jens]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Mar 2009 15:19:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rcecafe.net/?p=77#comment-152</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Hi Daniel!
No. I just want to check if the exe uses some runtime compilation (for example webservices sometimes do). If so, the executables usually cannot be packed/protected with the common applications you usually can use.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Daniel!<br />
No. I just want to check if the exe uses some runtime compilation (for example webservices sometimes do). If so, the executables usually cannot be packed/protected with the common applications you usually can use.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Daniel Pistelli		</title>
		<link>https://ntcore.com/multiple-update/#comment-151</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Daniel Pistelli]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Mar 2009 00:22:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rcecafe.net/?p=77#comment-151</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[high6: Yes, the new version will have file comparing capabilities.

Jens: Hello. What do you mean by reflections? If you mean that it uses the reflection namespace, the easiest way is to check the TypeRef tables.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>high6: Yes, the new version will have file comparing capabilities.</p>
<p>Jens: Hello. What do you mean by reflections? If you mean that it uses the reflection namespace, the easiest way is to check the TypeRef tables.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Jens		</title>
		<link>https://ntcore.com/multiple-update/#comment-150</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jens]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Mar 2009 12:04:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rcecafe.net/?p=77#comment-150</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Hi..
Daniel do you maybe know a way to detect if a .NET exe has reflections?
Thx in advance]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi..<br />
Daniel do you maybe know a way to detect if a .NET exe has reflections?<br />
Thx in advance</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: high6		</title>
		<link>https://ntcore.com/multiple-update/#comment-149</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[high6]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 22 Mar 2009 21:19:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rcecafe.net/?p=77#comment-149</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Will the new version have an exe comparing feature?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Will the new version have an exe comparing feature?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Daniel Pistelli		</title>
		<link>https://ntcore.com/multiple-update/#comment-148</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Daniel Pistelli]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 Mar 2009 17:34:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rcecafe.net/?p=77#comment-148</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[I understand, unfortunately you can&#039;t access .NET tables from script. If you need to solve all dependencies as well you may try out admiral&#039;s tool:
http://www.ring3circus.com/downloads/admiraldebilitate/
I&#039;ve never tried it, but maybe it&#039;s just what you need.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I understand, unfortunately you can&#8217;t access .NET tables from script. If you need to solve all dependencies as well you may try out admiral&#8217;s tool:<br />
<a href="http://www.ring3circus.com/downloads/admiraldebilitate/" rel="nofollow ugc">http://www.ring3circus.com/downloads/admiraldebilitate/</a><br />
I&#8217;ve never tried it, but maybe it&#8217;s just what you need.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Rene		</title>
		<link>https://ntcore.com/multiple-update/#comment-147</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Rene]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 Mar 2009 17:23:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rcecafe.net/?p=77#comment-147</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[hi thanks for the answer but what about in the references i used that removestrongnamesignature, but when try to load the app could not find the dll with that signature, so i had to go to the app references and put 0 in the ref public key]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>hi thanks for the answer but what about in the references i used that removestrongnamesignature, but when try to load the app could not find the dll with that signature, so i had to go to the app references and put 0 in the ref public key</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Daniel Pistelli		</title>
		<link>https://ntcore.com/multiple-update/#comment-146</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Daniel Pistelli]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 Mar 2009 00:31:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rcecafe.net/?p=77#comment-146</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Well, you can use the RemoveStrongNameSignature function to achieve that. You can&#039;t access the .NET metadata tables directly from script. For that you have to wait for the new CFF Explorer (when python will be embedded). But using RemoveStrongNameSignature produces the same result.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well, you can use the RemoveStrongNameSignature function to achieve that. You can&#8217;t access the .NET metadata tables directly from script. For that you have to wait for the new CFF Explorer (when python will be embedded). But using RemoveStrongNameSignature produces the same result.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
