Vulnerability Development mailing list archives
Re: reverse engineer c or java
From: 11a () GMX NET (Bluefish)
Date: Mon, 22 May 2000 21:12:34 +0200
ps. i've heard of a project to reverse binaries compiled with turbo pascal 7.0 back into source, but i think that it failed
IIRC Turbo Pascal produces quite easy code (probably because it doesn't optimize very much ;) so there's no reason why it should fail (as long as you assume the code doesn't contain inline assembly). But I'd say that creating a decomiler is much more work than creating a compiler (which I from experience know is a quite hard task) so it is very possible the developers simply realised that it was a bigger effort than they had the time and will to do. ..:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::.. http://www.11a.nu || http://bluefish.11a.nu eleventh alliance development & security team
Current thread:
- Re: reverse engineer c or java AnorEXia (May 20)
- Re: reverse engineer c or java Jacek Lipkowski (May 21)
- Re: reverse engineer c or java Bluefish (May 22)
- Re: reverse engineer c or java Jeff Bachtel (May 23)
- Re: reverse engineer c or java Crispin Cowan (May 28)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: reverse engineer c or java Miller, Timothy (May 21)
- Re: reverse engineer c or java Zoa_Chien (May 22)
- Re: reverse engineer c or java Michael Wojcik (May 22)
- Re: reverse engineer c or java Matt inAmsterdam (May 24)
- Re: reverse engineer c or java Matt inAmsterdam (May 25)
- Re: reverse engineer c or java Jacek Lipkowski (May 21)