有人试过codemoth: http://www.sourceformat.com/code-obfuscator.htm吗? 或者Themida: http://www.oreans.com/themida_features.php ?

晚一点看起来更有希望。

看看http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Security_by_obscurity#Arguments_against。我相信其他人可能也能给出一个更好的来源，说明为什么通过隐匿性实现安全是一件坏事。

它应该是完全可能的，使用现代加密技术，让您的系统是开放的(我不是说它应该是开放的，只是它可以是)，并且仍然具有完全的安全性，只要加密算法没有漏洞(如果您选择了一个好的算法，就不太可能)，您的私钥/密码保持私有，并且您的代码中没有安全漏洞(这是您应该担心的)。

正如很多人已经说过的:在一个普通的CPU上，你不能阻止它们，你只能延迟它们。就像我以前的密码学老师告诉我的那样:你不需要完美的加密，破解密码的代价肯定比获得的代价更大。你的困惑也是一样。

但还有3个注意事项:

It is possible to make reverse engineering impossible, BUT (and this is a very very big but), you cant do it on a conventional cpu. I did also much hardware development, and often FPGA are used. E.g. the Virtex 5 FX have a PowerPC CPU on them, and you can use the APU to implement own CPU opcodes in your hardware. You could use this facility to really decrypt incstuctions for the PowerPC, that is not accessible by the outside or other software, or even execute the command in the hardware. As the FPGA has builtin AES encryption for its configuration bitstream, you could not reverse engineer it (except someone manages to break AES, but then I guess we have other problems...). This ways vendors of hardware IP also protect their work. You speak from protocol. You dont say what kind of protocol it is, but when it is a network protocol you should at least protect it against network sniffing. This can you indeed do by encryption. But if you want to protect the en/decryption from an owner of the software, you are back to the obfuscation. Do make your programm undebuggable/unrunnable. Try to use some kind of detection of debugging and apply it e.g. in some formula oder adding a debug register content to a magic constant. It is much harder if your program looks in debug mode is if it where running normal, but makes a complete wrong computation, operation, or some other. E.g. I know some eco games, that had a really nasty copy-protection (I know you dont want copyprotection, but it is similar): The stolen version altered the mined resources after 30 mins of game play, and suddenly you got just a single resource. The pirate just cracked it (i.e. reverse engineered it) - checked if it run, and volia released it. Such slight behaviour changings are very hard to detect, esp. if they do not appear instantly to detection, but only delayed.

所以最后我想建议: 估算逆向工程人员的收益，将其转化为一些时间(例如，使用最便宜的印度工资)，并进行逆向工程，使时间成本更大。

为了避免逆向工程，您不能将代码提供给用户。也就是说，我建议使用在线应用程序……然而(因为你没有给出背景)，这对你来说可能是毫无意义的。

起初，虚拟机中受保护的代码似乎不可能进行逆向工程。Themida封隔器

但它不再那么安全了。无论你如何打包你的代码，你总是可以对任何加载的可执行文件进行内存转储，并使用任何反汇编程序(如IDA Pro)进行反汇编。

IDA Pro还提供了一个漂亮的汇编代码到C源代码转换器，尽管生成的代码看起来更像一个指针/地址数学混乱。如果你把它与原来的比较，你可以修复所有的错误，并撕下任何东西。

我不认为任何代码都是牢不可破的，但奖励必须非常棒，才能让人们愿意尝试它。

话虽如此，你还是应该做以下事情:

Use the highest optimization level possible (reverse engineering is not only about getting the assembly sequence, it is also about understanding the code and porting it into a higher-level language such as C). Highly optimized code can be a b---h to follow. Make structures dense by not having larger data types than necessary. Rearrange structure members between official code releases. Rearranged bit fields in structures are also something you can use. You can check for the presence of certain values which shouldn't be changed (a copyright message is an example). If a byte vector contains "vwxyz" you can have another byte vector containing "abcde" and compare the differences. The function doing it should not be passed pointers to the vectors but use external pointers defined in other modules as (pseudo-C code) "char *p1=&string1[539];" and "char p2=&string2[-11731];". That way there won't be any pointers pointing exactly at the two strings. In the comparison code you then compare for "(p1-539+i)-*(p2+11731+i)==some value". The cracker will think it is safe to change string1 because no one appears to reference it. Bury the test in some unexpected place.

尝试自己破解汇编代码，看看哪些是容易的，哪些是困难的。您可以尝试一些想法，使代码更难进行反向工程，并使调试更加困难。