DOCSLIB.ORG

Retdec: an Open-Source Machine-Code Decompiler

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Retdec: an Open-Source Machine-Code Decompiler RetDec: An Open-Source Machine-Code Decompiler Jakub Kˇroustek Peter Matula Petr Zemek Threat Labs Botconf 2017 1 / 51 ♂ Peter Matula • main developer of the RetDec decompiler • senior developer @Avast (previously @AVG) • ♥ rock climbing and • R [email protected] > whoarewe ♂ Jakub Kˇroustek • founder of RetDec • Threat Labs lead @Avast (previously @AVG) • reverse engineer, malware hunter, security researcher • 7 @JakubKroustek • R [email protected] Botconf 2017 2 / 51 > whoarewe ♂ Jakub Kˇroustek • founder of RetDec • Threat Labs lead @Avast (previously @AVG) • reverse engineer, malware hunter, security researcher • 7 @JakubKroustek • R [email protected] ♂ Peter Matula • main developer of the RetDec decompiler • senior developer @Avast (previously @AVG) • ♥ rock climbing and • R [email protected] Botconf 2017 2 / 51 Quiz Time Botconf 2017 3 / 51 Quiz Time Botconf 2017 4 / 51 Quiz Time Botconf 2017 5 / 51 Quiz Time Botconf 2017 6 / 51 Disassembling vs. Decompilation Botconf 2017 7 / 51 Decompilation? What is it? Botconf 2017 8 / 51 è Binary recompilation (yeah, like that’s ever gonna work) • porting • bug fixing • adding new features • original sources got lost • optimizations Decompilation? What good is it? ü Binary analysis • reverse engineering • malware analysis • vulnerability detection • verification • binary comparison • ... Botconf 2017 9 / 51 Decompilation? What good is it? ü Binary analysis • reverse engineering • malware analysis • vulnerability detection • verification • binary comparison • ... è Binary recompilation (yeah, like that’s ever gonna work) • porting • bug fixing • adding new features • original sources got lost • optimizations Botconf 2017 9 / 51 • It is damn hard • compilation is not lossless • high-level constructions • data types • names • comments, macros, . • compilers are optimizing • computer science goodies • undecidable problems • complex algorithms • exponential complexities • obfuscation, packing, anti-debugging Ok, why aren’t we already using it? • Multiple existing tools: Hex-Rays, Hopper, Snowman, etc. Botconf 2017 10 / 51 • compilation is not lossless • high-level constructions • data types • names • comments, macros, . • compilers are optimizing • computer science goodies • undecidable problems • complex algorithms • exponential complexities • obfuscation, packing, anti-debugging Ok, why aren’t we already using it? • Multiple existing tools: Hex-Rays, Hopper, Snowman, etc. • It is damn hard Botconf 2017 10 / 51 • compilers are optimizing • computer science goodies • undecidable problems • complex algorithms • exponential complexities • obfuscation, packing, anti-debugging Ok, why aren’t we already using it? • Multiple existing tools: Hex-Rays, Hopper, Snowman, etc. • It is damn hard • compilation is not lossless • high-level constructions • data types • names • comments, macros, . Botconf 2017 10 / 51 • computer science goodies • undecidable problems • complex algorithms • exponential complexities • obfuscation, packing, anti-debugging Ok, why aren’t we already using it? • Multiple existing tools: Hex-Rays, Hopper, Snowman, etc. • It is damn hard • compilation is not lossless • high-level constructions • data types • names • comments, macros, . • compilers are optimizing Botconf 2017 10 / 51 • obfuscation, packing, anti-debugging Ok, why aren’t we already using it? • Multiple existing tools: Hex-Rays, Hopper, Snowman, etc. • It is damn hard • compilation is not lossless • high-level constructions • data types • names • comments, macros, . • compilers are optimizing • computer science goodies • undecidable problems • complex algorithms • exponential complexities Botconf 2017 10 / 51 Ok, why aren’t we already using it? • Multiple existing tools: Hex-Rays, Hopper, Snowman, etc. • It is damn hard • compilation is not lossless • high-level constructions • data types • names • comments, macros, . • compilers are optimizing • computer science goodies • undecidable problems • complex algorithms • exponential complexities • obfuscation, packing, anti-debugging Botconf 2017 10 / 51 • Many ABIs • Many OFFs (object-file formats) • ± ELF, q PE, Mach-O, . • Many programming languages • Many compilers & optimizations • Statically linked code • ... Generic decompilation? Even harder • Many architectures • x86, ARM, MIPS, PowerPC, . • CISC vs. RISC • bit length, endianness, floating points • versions & extensions Botconf 2017 11 / 51 • Many OFFs (object-file formats) • ± ELF, q PE, Mach-O, . • Many programming languages • Many compilers & optimizations • Statically linked code • ... Generic decompilation? Even harder • Many architectures • x86, ARM, MIPS, PowerPC, . • CISC vs. RISC • bit length, endianness, floating points • versions & extensions • Many ABIs Botconf 2017 11 / 51 • Many programming languages • Many compilers & optimizations • Statically linked code • ... Generic decompilation? Even harder • Many architectures • x86, ARM, MIPS, PowerPC, . • CISC vs. RISC • bit length, endianness, floating points • versions & extensions • Many ABIs • Many OFFs (object-file formats) • ± ELF, q PE, Mach-O, . Botconf 2017 11 / 51 • Many compilers & optimizations • Statically linked code • ... Generic decompilation? Even harder • Many architectures • x86, ARM, MIPS, PowerPC, . • CISC vs. RISC • bit length, endianness, floating points • versions & extensions • Many ABIs • Many OFFs (object-file formats) • ± ELF, q PE, Mach-O, . • Many programming languages Botconf 2017 11 / 51 • Statically linked code • ... Generic decompilation? Even harder • Many architectures • x86, ARM, MIPS, PowerPC, . • CISC vs. RISC • bit length, endianness, floating points • versions & extensions • Many ABIs • Many OFFs (object-file formats) • ± ELF, q PE, Mach-O, . • Many programming languages • Many compilers & optimizations Botconf 2017 11 / 51 • ... Generic decompilation? Even harder • Many architectures • x86, ARM, MIPS, PowerPC, . • CISC vs. RISC • bit length, endianness, floating points • versions & extensions • Many ABIs • Many OFFs (object-file formats) • ± ELF, q PE, Mach-O, . • Many programming languages • Many compilers & optimizations • Statically linked code Botconf 2017 11 / 51 Generic decompilation? Even harder • Many architectures • x86, ARM, MIPS, PowerPC, . • CISC vs. RISC • bit length, endianness, floating points • versions & extensions • Many ABIs • Many OFFs (object-file formats) • ± ELF, q PE, Mach-O, . • Many programming languages • Many compilers & optimizations • Statically linked code • ... Botconf 2017 11 / 51 ƽ History • 2011–2013 (AVG + BUT FIT via TACRˇ TA01010667 grant) • 2013–2016 (AVG + BUT FIT students via diploma theses) • 2016–* (Avast + BUT FIT students) People ȯ 3-4 core developers Ƅ ≈ 20 BSc/MSc/PhD students ǀ Lines of code ì 419,451 code 7 205,222 comments, etc. Ý 624,673 total Retargetable Decompiler (RetDec) ◎ Goal • generic decompilation of binary code Botconf 2017 12 / 51 People ȯ 3-4 core developers Ƅ ≈ 20 BSc/MSc/PhD students ǀ Lines of code ì 419,451 code 7 205,222 comments, etc. Ý 624,673 total Retargetable Decompiler (RetDec) ◎ Goal • generic decompilation of binary code ƽ History • 2011–2013 (AVG + BUT FIT via TACRˇ TA01010667 grant) • 2013–2016 (AVG + BUT FIT students via diploma theses) • 2016–* (Avast + BUT FIT students) Botconf 2017 12 / 51 ǀ Lines of code ì 419,451 code 7 205,222 comments, etc. Ý 624,673 total Retargetable Decompiler (RetDec) ◎ Goal • generic decompilation of binary code ƽ History • 2011–2013 (AVG + BUT FIT via TACRˇ TA01010667 grant) • 2013–2016 (AVG + BUT FIT students via diploma theses) • 2016–* (Avast + BUT FIT students) People ȯ 3-4 core developers Ƅ ≈ 20 BSc/MSc/PhD students Botconf 2017 12 / 51 Retargetable Decompiler (RetDec) ◎ Goal • generic decompilation of binary code ƽ History • 2011–2013 (AVG + BUT FIT via TACRˇ TA01010667 grant) • 2013–2016 (AVG + BUT FIT students via diploma theses) • 2016–* (Avast + BUT FIT students) People ȯ 3-4 core developers Ƅ ≈ 20 BSc/MSc/PhD students ǀ Lines of code ì 419,451 code 7 205,222 comments, etc. Ý 624,673 total Botconf 2017 12 / 51 3 Does • compiler/packer detection • statically linked code detection • OS loader simulation • recursive traversal disassembling • high-level constructions/types reconstruction • pattern detection • ... Ù Runs on (hopefully) RetDec? What does it do ¿ Supports • architectures (32-bit): x86, ARM, PowerPC, MIPS • OFFs: ELF, PE, COFF, Mach-O, Intel HEX, AR, raw • compilers (we test with): gcc, Clang, MSVC Botconf 2017 13 / 51 Ù Runs on (hopefully) RetDec? What does it do ¿ Supports • architectures (32-bit): x86, ARM, PowerPC, MIPS • OFFs: ELF, PE, COFF, Mach-O, Intel HEX, AR, raw • compilers (we test with): gcc, Clang, MSVC 3 Does • compiler/packer detection • statically linked code detection • OS loader simulation • recursive traversal disassembling • high-level constructions/types reconstruction • pattern detection • ... Botconf 2017 13 / 51 RetDec? What does it do ¿ Supports • architectures (32-bit): x86, ARM, PowerPC, MIPS • OFFs: ELF, PE, COFF, Mach-O, Intel HEX, AR, raw • compilers (we test with): gcc, Clang, MSVC 3 Does • compiler/packer detection • statically linked code detection • OS loader simulation • recursive traversal disassembling • high-level constructions/types reconstruction • pattern detection • ... Ù Runs on (hopefully) Botconf 2017 13 / 51 á Repositories C 11 core ¿ 6 support 8 third party Ò Contacts ɂ https://retdec.com/ https://github.com/avast-tl 7 https://twitter.com/retdec ø https://retdec.com/rss/ R [email protected] Good news everyone!
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Reverse Software Engineering As a Project-Based Learning Tool
    Paper ID #33764 Reverse Software Engineering as a Project-Based Learning Tool Ms. Cynthia C. Fry, Baylor University CYNTHIA C. FRY is currently a Senior Lecturer of Computer Science at Baylor University. She worked at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center as a Senior Project Engineer, a Crew Training Manager, and the Science Operations Director for STS-46. She was an Engineering Duty Officer in the U.S. Navy (IRR), and worked with the Naval Maritime Intelligence Center as a Scientific/Technical Intelligence Analyst. She was the owner and chief systems engineer for Systems Engineering Services (SES), a computer systems design, development, and consultation firm. She joined the faculty of the School of Engineering and Computer Science at Baylor University in 1997, where she teaches a variety of engineering and computer science classes, she is the Faculty Advisor for the Women in Computer Science (WiCS), the Director of the Computer Science Fellows program, and is a KEEN Fellow. She has authored and co- authored over fifty peer-reviewed papers. Mr. Zachary Michael Steudel Zachary Steudel is a 2021 graduate of Baylor University’s computer science department. In his time at Baylor, he worked as a Teaching Assistant under Ms. Cynthia C. Fry. As part of the Teaching Assistant role, Zachary designed and created the group project for the Computer Systems course. Zachary Steudel worked as a Software Developer Intern at Amazon in the Summer of 2019, a Software Engineer Intern at Microsoft in the Summer of 2020, and begins his full-time career with Amazon in the summer of 2021 as a software engineer.
    [Show full text]
  • Decompilation of Binary Programs
    SOFTWARE—PRACTICE AND EXPERIENCE, VOL. 25(7), 811–829 (JULY 1995) Decompilation of Binary Programs CRISTINA CIFUENTES∗ AND K. JOHN GOUGH (email: cifuente@fit.qut.edu.au gough@fit.qut.edu.au) School of Computing Science, Queensland University of Technology, GPO Box 2434, Brisbane QLD 4001, Australia SUMMARY The structure of a decompiler is presented, along with a thorough description of the different modules that form part of a decompiler, and the type of analyses that are performed on the machine code to regenerate high-level language code. The phases of the decompiler have been grouped into three main modules: front-end, universal decompiling machine, and back-end. The front-end is a machine-dependent module that performs the loading, parsing and semantic analysis of the input program, as well as generating an intermediate representation of the program. The universal decompiling machine is a machine- and language-independent module that performs data and control flow analysis of the program based on the intermediate representation, and the program’s control flow graph. The back-end is a language-dependent module that deals with the details of the target high-level language. In order to increase the readability of the generated programs, a decompiling system has been imple- mented which integrates a decompiler, dcc, and an automatic signature generator, dccSign. Signatures for libraries and compilers are stored in a database that is read by the decompiler; thus, the generated programs can make use of known library names, such as WriteLn() and printf(). dcc is a decompiler for the Intel 80286 architecture and the DOS operating system.
    [Show full text]
  • Native X86 Decompilation Using Semantics- Preserving Structural Analysis and Iterative Control-Flow Structuring Edward J
    Native x86 Decompilation Using Semantics- Preserving Structural Analysis and Iterative Control-Flow Structuring Edward J. Schwartz, Carnegie Mellon University; JongHyup Lee, Korea National University of Transportation; Maverick Woo and David Brumley, Carnegie Mellon University This paper is included in the Proceedings of the 22nd USENIX Security Symposium. August 14–16, 2013 • Washington, D.C., USA ISBN 978-1-931971-03-4 Open access to the Proceedings of the 22nd USENIX Security Symposium is sponsored by USENIX Native x86 Decompilation using Semantics-Preserving Structural Analysis and Iterative Control-Flow Structuring Edward J. Schwartz JongHyup Lee Carnegie Mellon University Korea National University of Transportation Maverick Woo David Brumley Carnegie Mellon University Carnegie Mellon University Abstract in the literature assume access to source code. For in- stance, there are numerous source-based static vulnera- There are many security tools and techniques for analyz- bility finding tools such as KINT [40], RICH [9], and ing software, but many of them require access to source Coverity [6], but equivalent binary-only tools are scarce. code. We propose leveraging decompilation, the study In many security scenarios, however, access to source of recovering abstractions from compiled code, to apply code is simply not a reasonable assumption. Common existing source-based tools and techniques to compiled counterexamples include analyzing commercial off-the- programs. A decompiler should focus on two properties shelf software for vulnerabilities and reverse engineering to be used for security. First, it should recover abstractions malware. The traditional approach in security has been to as much as possible to minimize the complexity that must directly apply some form of low-level binary analysis that be handled by the security analysis that follows.
    [Show full text]
  • Improving Disassembly and Decompilation Or Moderately Advanced Ghidra Usage
    Improving Disassembly and Decompilation or Moderately Advanced Ghidra Usage 1/ 82 Table of Contents Intro and Setup Improving Disassembly Improving Decompilation: Data Types Improving Decompilation: Function Calls Improving Decompilation: Control Flow 2/ 82 Table of Contents Improving Decompilation: Data Mutability Improving Decompilation: Setting Register Values Troubleshooting Decompilation 3/ 82 Intro and Setup Contents Intro and Setup Introduction Setup 4/ 82 Intro and Setup Introduction Intro Like any SRE tool, Ghidra makes assumptions which sometimes need to be adjusted by reverse engineers. These slides describe techniques for recognizing problematic situations and steps you can take to improve Ghidra's analysis. These slides assume basic familiarity with Ghidra. Note: the materials for the \Beginner" and \Intermediate" Ghidra classes are included with the Ghidra distribution. 5/ 82 Intro and Setup Setup Setup First, create a new project for the example files used by these slides. Next, import the files. They are located in hghidra diri/docs/GhidraClass/ExerciseFiles/Advanced The easiest way to do this is to use the Batch Importer (File ! Batch Import... from the Project Window). 6/ 82 Improving Disassembly Contents Improving Disassembly Evaluating Analysis: The Entropy and Overview Windows Non-Returning Functions Function Start Patterns 7/ 82 Improving Disassembly Evaluating Analysis: The Entropy and Overview Windows Evaluation Use the entropy and overview sidebars to get a quick sense of how well a binary has been analyzed/disassembled. For instance, the entropy sidebar can tell you whether your binary has regions which are likely encrypted or compressed. To activate these sidebars, use the dropdown menu in the Listing (immediately to the right of the camera icon).
    [Show full text]
  • Decompiler: Reversing Compilation
    Decompiler: Reversing Compilation Written By, Tushar B Kute, Lecturer in Information Technology (K. K. Wagh Polytechnic, Nashik – 3, Maharashtra, INDIA) Email – [email protected] Decompiler: Reversing Compilation - 1 - Abstract This paper presents an overview of Decompiler, a program which performs exact reverse process of compilers i.e. creating high level language code from a machine /assembly language code. Decompiler comes into picture when user needs source code from executables during number of occasions. Decompiler mainly deals with Reverse Engineering, which can be used for positive as well as negative purposes depending on application user uses it for. Hence we also need ways to protect our code from Decompiler to avoid misuse. In Industry people are taking Decompilation quite seriously like any other department while discovering its usability. In this paper I have a foot in two different camps, as a programmer I’m interested in understanding how others achieve interesting effects but from a business point of view I’m not too keen on someone reusing my code and selling them onto third parties as their own. This paper presents an overview of the Decompiler’s working and area of usability. Decompiler: Reversing Compilation - 2 - Introduction A Decompiler is a program that reads a program written in machine language and translates it into equivalent program in HLL. A Process done by Decompiler is Decompilation which is the reverse process of compilation i.e. creating high level language code from machine/assembly language code. At the basic level, it just requires to understand the machine/assembly code and rewrite it into a high level language.
    [Show full text]
  • JEB by PNF Software the Interactive Android Decompiler
    JEB by PNF Software The Interactive Android Decompiler JEB is the most powerful Android app decompiler, designed for security professionals. Cut your reverse engineering time and leverage the API for your automation needs. POWERFUL JEB's unique feature is its ability to decompile true Dalvik bytecode to Java source code. No more unreliable dex-to-jar conversion: Our in-house, full-fledged Dalvik decompiler produces clean, structured, and semantically correct code. FLEXIBLE Analysts need flexible tools, especially when they deal with obfuscated or protected pieces of code. JEB's user interface allows you to examine cross- references, rename methods, fields, classes, navigate between code and data, take notes, add comments, etc. EXTENSIBLE Leverage the application programming interface (API) to extend JEB with scripts and plugins. Example: Access the AST of decompiled Java code to remove obfuscation layers; Use non- interactive JEB to automate back-end processing. Languages offered through the API: Python, Java. JEB © PNF Software, Inc. – [email protected] – www.pnfsoftware.com 1/2 JEB by PNF Software The Interactive Android Decompiler Two major advantages of JEB over existing tools are its interactivity and industrial- grade decompiler output. They allow reverse engineers to analyze and gradually understand complex pieces of code. Third-party Java decompiler output (left) - Static code, no interactivity - Decompilation errors (arrows) - Result in unreadability and poor usability JEB's output (right), after the code was analyzed by an engineer. The method code is neatly structured and readable. Find more examples on our website. Ask for a demo version and find out more about pricing details on our website.
    [Show full text]
  • Retdec-Python Documentation Release 0.6-Dev
    retdec-python Documentation Release 0.6-dev Petr Zemek and contributors Oct 11, 2018 Contents 1 Contents 3 1.1 Quickstart................................................3 1.2 Library..................................................4 1.3 Scripts..................................................8 1.4 Contributing............................................... 11 1.5 Status................................................... 11 2 Indices 15 i ii retdec-python Documentation, Release 0.6-dev retdec-python is a Python library and tools providing easy access to the retdec.com decompilation service through their public REST API. Contents 1 retdec-python Documentation, Release 0.6-dev 2 Contents CHAPTER 1 Contents 1.1 Quickstart This page gives an overview of the library and tools to get you started. 1.1.1 Requirements • Python >= 3.4 (CPython or PyPy) • requests module for making HTTPS calls to the retdec.com API 1.1.2 Installation The recommended way of installing is from Python Package Index (PyPI) with pip: $ pip install retdec-python This will install the latest stable version, including all dependencies. You can also install the latest development version directly from GitHub: $ pip install git+https://github.com/s3rvac/retdec-python 1.1.3 Prerequisites To be able to actually use the library and scripts, you need to register at retdec.com. After that, log in and click on Account. There, you will find your API key, which is used for authentication. Attention: Be careful not to disclose your API key to anyone! You have to keep it a secret. 3
    [Show full text]
  • Brno University of Technology Decompilation
    BRNO UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY VYSOKÉ UČENÍ TECHNICKÉ V BRNĚ FACULTY OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY FAKULTA INFORMAČNÍCH TECHNOLOGIÍ DEPARTMENT OF INFORMATION SYSTEMS ÚSTAV INFORMAČNÍCH SYSTÉMŮ DECOMPILATION OF SPECIALIZED AND ADVANCED INSTRUCTION SETS ZPĚTNÝ PŘEKLAD SPECIALIZOVANÝCH A POKROČILÝCH INSTRUKČNÍCH SAD BACHELOR’S THESIS BAKALÁŘSKÁ PRÁCE AUTHOR JURAJ HOLUB AUTOR PRÁCE SUPERVISOR Ing. ZBYNĚK KŘIVKA, Ph.D. VEDOUCÍ PRÁCE BRNO 2020 Brno University of Technology Faculty of Information Technology Department of Information Systems (DIFS) Academic year 2019/2020 Bachelor's Thesis Specification Student: Holub Juraj Programme: Information Technology Title: Decompilation of Specialized and Advanced Instruction Sets Category: Compiler Construction Assignment: 1. Study the problems of reverse engineering. Focus on the decompilation of a binary code to its high-level representation. 2. Familiarize yourself with RetDec decompiler and research technologies used in this decompiler (LLVM, Capstone, Keystone, etc.). 3. Familiarize yourself with the processor architectures supported by RetDec decompiler. Focus on unsupported or partially supported processor extensions and instruction sets. 4. Analyze current flaws and potential obstacles in adding support for these instruction sets. Select a set of instruction extensions with the best ratio of positive impact for the decompilation quality to difficulty of their implementation. 5. Design new components and propose modifications to RetDec decompiler necessary for the implementation of the instruction sets chosen in point 4. 6. After a discussion with the supervisor and the consultant, implement features from point 5. 7. Carefully test the implemented solution. Include real-world programs making use of the selected instruction extensions in your test suite. 8. Summarize your thesis and discuss future developments. Recommended literature: E.
    [Show full text]
  • Analysis of Low-Level Code Using Cooperating Decompilers?
    Analysis of Low-Level Code Using Cooperating Decompilers? Bor-Yuh Evan Chang, Matthew Harren, and George C. Necula University of California, Berkeley, California, USA {bec,matth,necula}@cs.berkeley.edu Abstract. Analysis or verification of low-level code is useful for min- imizing the disconnect between what is verified and what is actually executed and is necessary when source code is unavailable or is, say, intermingled with inline assembly. We present a modular framework for building pipelines of cooperating decompilers that gradually lift the level of the language to something appropriate for source-level tools. Each de- compilation stage contains an abstract interpreter that encapsulates its findings about the program by translating the program into a higher- level intermediate language. We provide evidence for the modularity of this framework through the implementation of multiple decompilation pipelines for both x86 and MIPS assembly produced by gcc, gcj, and coolc (a compiler for a pedagogical Java-like language) that share sev- eral low-level components. Finally, we discuss our experimental results that apply the BLAST model checker for C and the Cqual analyzer to decompiled assembly. 1 Introduction There is a growing interest in applying software-quality tools to low-level rep- resentations of programs, such as intermediate or virtual-machine languages, or even on native machine code. We want to be able to analyze code whose source is either not available (e.g., libraries) or not easily analyzable (e.g., programs writ- ten in languages with complex semantics such as C++, or programs that contain inline assembly). This allows us to analyze the code that is actually executed and to ignore possible compilation errors or arbitrary interpretations of underspec- ified source-language semantics.
    [Show full text]
  • Intellij IDEA, the Most Intelligent Java
    IntelliJ IDEA, the most intelligent Java IDE IntelliJ IDEA, JetBrains’ flagship Java IDE, Every aspect of IntelliJ IDEA is specifically How does IntelliJ IDEA provides high-class support and productivity designed to maximize developer productiv- match up against competing tools? boosts for enterprise, mobile and web devel- ity. Together, powerful static code analysis opment in Java, Scala and Groovy, with all and ergonomic design make development Products versions in comparison the latest technologies and frameworks sup- a productive and enjoyable experience. ported out of the box. Compatibility with Operating systems Marketing / Market / Community comparison Community Comparison Platform More Information To learn more about the product, please visit our website at jetbrains.com/idea After IntelliJ IDEA has indexed your source languages and frameworks are at hand — IntelliJ IDEA is available in two editions: code, it ofers a blazingly fast and intelligent no plugin hustle included. While IntelliJ coding experience by giving relevant sug- IDEA is an IDE for Java, it also understands • Community Edition (free) gestions in every context: instant and clever and provides intelligent coding assistance • Ultimate Edition (paid) code completion, on-the-fly code analysis for a large variety of other languages such and reliable refactoring tools. Mission-critical as SQL, JPQL, HTML, JavaScript, and more, tools such as integration with version con- even when the language expression is inject- trols systems and a wide variety of supported ed into a String
    [Show full text]
  • Hex-Rays E-Mail: [email protected] Tel: +32-4-222-4300 Fax: +32-4-223-5600 Decompilation Vs
    Hex-Rays http://www.hex-rays.com E-mail: [email protected] Tel: +32-4-222-4300 Fax: +32-4-223-5600 Decompilation vs. Disassembly A decompiler represents executable binary files in a readable form. More precisely, it transforms binary code into text that software developers can read and modify. The software security industry relies on this transformation to analyze and validate programs. The analysis is performed on the binary code because the source code (the text form of the software) traditionally is not available, because it is considered a commercial secret. Programs to transform binary code into text form have always existed. Simple one-to-one mapping of processor instruction codes into instruction mnemonics is performed by disassemblers. Many disassemblers are available on the market, both free and commercial. The most powerful disassembler is IDA Pro, published by Datarescue. It can handle binary code for a huge number of processors and has open architecture that allows developers to write add-on analytic modules. Pic 1. Disassembler output Decompilers are different from disassemblers in one very important aspect. While both generate human readable text, decompilers generate much higher level text, which is more concise and much easier to read. Page 1 of 4 Copyright 2007 © Hex-Rays | [email protected] Compared to low level assembly language, high level language representation has several advantages: ✔ It is consise. ✔ It is structured. ✔ It doesn't require developers to know the assembly language. ✔ It recognizes and converts low level idioms into high level notions. ✔ It is less confusing and therefore easier to understand.
    [Show full text]
  • Java Decompiler Diversity and Its Application to Meta-Decompilation ∗ Nicolas Harrand , César Soto-Valero, Martin Monperrus and Benoit Baudry
    Java Decompiler Diversity and its Application to Meta-decompilation < Nicolas Harrand , César Soto-Valero, Martin Monperrus and Benoit Baudry KTH Royal Institute of Technology, SE-100 44 Stockholm, Sweden ARTICLEINFO ABSTRACT Keywords: During compilation from Java source code to bytecode, some information is irreversibly lost. In other Java bytecode words, compilation and decompilation of Java code is not symmetric. Consequently, decompilation, decompilation which aims at producing source code from bytecode, relies on strategies to reconstruct the information reverse engineering that has been lost. Different Java decompilers use distinct strategies to achieve proper decompilation. source code analysis In this work, we hypothesize that the diverse ways in which bytecode can be decompiled has a direct impact on the quality of the source code produced by decompilers. In this paper, we assess the strategies of eight Java decompilers with respect to three quality indica- tors: syntactic correctness, syntactic distortion and semantic equivalence modulo inputs. Our results show that no single modern decompiler is able to correctly handle the variety of bytecode structures coming from real-world programs. The highest ranking decompiler in this study produces syntacti- cally correct, and semantically equivalent code output for 84%, respectively 78%, of the classes in our dataset. Our results demonstrate that each decompiler correctly handles a different set of bytecode classes. We propose a new decompiler called Arlecchino that leverages the diversity of existing decompil- ers. To do so, we merge partial decompilation into a new one based on compilation errors. Arlecchino handles 37:6~ of bytecode classes that were previously handled by no decompiler. We publish the sources of this new bytecode decompiler.
    [Show full text]