客户端上运行的任何东西都可以被反编译和破解。混淆只会让它更难。我不了解你的应用程序，但99%的情况下，我认为不值得这么做。

只需编写一个好的应用程序和一个简单的保护系统。不管你选择什么保护，它都会被逆转……所以不要浪费太多时间/金钱。

Use online update to block those unlicensed copies. Verify serial number from different modules of your application and do not use a single function call to do the verification (so that crackers cannot bypass the verification easily). Not only check serial number at startup, do the verification while saving data, do it every Friday evening, do it when user is idle ... Verify application file check sum, store your security check sum in different places. Don't go too far on these kind of tricks, make sure your application never crash/get into malfunction while verifying registration code. Build a useful app for users is much more important than make a unbreakable binary for crackers.

请记住，99%以上的用户不会有兴趣检查你的可执行文件，看看它是如何工作的。

考虑到很少有人会去尝试，而且大多数混淆器都是可以解决的，它值得你花时间和精力吗?

你最好把时间投入到改进你的产品上，让更多人愿意使用它。

您不能完全保护任何应用程序(托管与否)。如果像Playstation和iPad这样的系统都被破解了——厂商甚至控制着硬件——你的应用还有什么希望呢?幸运的是，你并不是真的想这么做。在我看来，你需要确保你的应用程序足够安全，这样别人就不会意外地窃取你的产品。

例如，如果使用每台机器许可证，那么它不应该只在安装到新的第二台机器上时才能工作。你需要一个好的错误消息来防止额外的支持呼叫，但不要花费额外的时间让它难以解决，也不要用它来打击用户。

另一个例子是限时审判。甚至不用担心简单的事情，比如用户是否可以回滚系统时钟。这样做的人知道他们违反了您的许可，只要用户知道他们违反了您的许可，您就做得够多了。

You need to do this much because users don't care about your license. Licenses are made-up things that nobody cares about until they need to. No one reads them, and they really shouldn't have to. Therefore the best way to tell the user where the boundaries are is if the out-of-the-box behavior for your application complies with the license. In this first case that means either failing to install or installing in trial-version mode the second time. For the latter, it might just mean checking a plain-text date in a configuration file. Either way, make sure you handle it in an elegant, helpful, and respectful manner.

So that explains what it means do just that much. But why not go any further? Why not plug every little hole you can find? The answer is in two parts. First, if someone will cross the ethical threshold of consciously breaking your license terms — even in a simple way — they'll also be willing to do something more difficult or dangerous like pull your application from a torrent site — and there is a certain amount of danger involved in running applications downloaded from untrusted sources. Making it any harder is only a minor annoyance for these users and risks causing problems with your paying customers. Keeping it simple may prevent someone from digging into your application and releasing a more comprehensive crack. Second, you have few eyes available to look for flaws; the hackers have many, and they have more practice finding them. You only need to miss one little flaw, and your app will have the same distribution on pirate sites as if you did nothing. You have to be right every time; they only have to be lucky once. So the effort required is very high, and the likelihood of any measure of success is very low.

Ultimately, if someone wants to pirate your application (as opposed to just using it), and that is their main goal, they will. There's nothing you can do to stop them. This is the nature of software; once the files that make up your product are on a user's computer they will be able to do with them as they wish. This is especially relevant in managed environments like Java or .NET, but it definitely applies to native code as well. Time is on their side, and given enough time any digital security can be broken.

Since you can't stop users from pirating your product, your best course of action is to engage this class of user in a way the uses them to your benefit. It is often possible to get them working for you rather than against you. With that in mind, no matter what your application is, it's probably worth it to keep a free version that is almost completely functional and doesn't expire. The difference between even a US$1 price tag and free is huge, if for no other reason than that the customer doesn't have to trust you with their credit card. A free edition of your product will not only effectively kill pirated distribution (why risk a pirated version when you can be legitimate for the same price?), it has the potential to dramatically expand your audience.

结果是，你可能需要提高付费版的价格，这样最终你就有10万免费用户，而不是2000个用户，每人20美元，其中500人愿意为“专业版”支付99美元。这比你花大量时间锁定你的产品赚得更多。不仅如此，你还可以通过多种重要方式吸引这些免费用户并利用这种关系。

一是支持。悲观主义者会借此机会抱怨支持10万免费用户的成本增加，但令人惊讶的事情却发生了:你的产品基本上可以自给自足。在没有资金支持成本的大型开源项目中，您经常会看到这种情况。用户会挺身而出，让它成为现实。

Free users generally have reduced support expectations to begin with, and for good reason. All you need to do is mark the free edition as only qualifying for community support and put up a user-moderated online forum for that purpose. Your support knowledge base is self-generating, and advanced users will shepherd those who need extra hand-holding on your behalf. Even more importantly, this will allow you to identify and correct bugs faster, ultimately improving the quality of your product and lowering total support costs. This wasn't possible before because your user base wasn't large enough, but when you treat the free users as customers it can work very well.

另一个是反馈。通过观察你的论坛，你可以学到重要的改进想法，否则你可能从来没有考虑过。这可以让你最终将更多免费用户转变为付费用户，并创造出更有吸引力的产品，从而吸引更多用户。

最后，你需要考虑市场营销。所有这些免费用户现在都是粉丝，而不是对手，他们会采取相应的行动。不仅如此，当你发布下一个版本时，这些用户都将通过你批准的分发渠道，而不是其他未知的机制。这意味着在你的下一个版本中，你开始与更大的、高度感兴趣和支持你的观众建立联系。

The best features to reserve for the professional edition are tools aimed at making it easy to do corporate deployment and management. A cracker won't see these as a compelling enough reason to hack it for his own use, but for a business looking to buy 300 licenses and push it out company-wide this is a must-have. Of course, the professional edition will be pirated anyway, but again: don't sweat it because you probably wouldn't be able to sell the product to those pirates no matter what you did, so it's not costing you any revenue.

While psychologically it can be hard to give away your product this much, hopefully you can understand how it really is the best way to go. Not only that, it's the only way to go in the long term. I know someone is out there thinking that they don't want to do it this way. After all, they've got by just fine selling their locked-down $20 product for years. But that's just too bad, because if you don't do it this way, eventually someone else will. And their product will be just as good as yours, or close enough they can get away with claiming that. Then all of a sudden your pricing looks outrageous, sales drop dramatically, and there's nothing else you can do. You can opt for an additional middle tier if you must, but it's unlikely to help you.

我也做了一些关于黑客安全的考虑，在我的设计中，我想添加他们，因为他们中的一些人似乎没有被提及:

我在我的应用程序中有一个脚本接口。为了确保，脚本只能调用(python)打算调用的方法-脚本i有一个scriptvisibilityattribute和System.Dynamic.DynamicMetaObjectProvider，它可以识别这些属性。

license使用公钥/私钥。

ViewModels需要被解锁，给解锁函数一个密码。

CoreRoutines可以在加密狗上实现。(周围有加密狗支持)

像包装这样的大解决方案并不是计划好的。

当然，这种脚本/viewModel方法并没有使我们不可能从代码中解锁和调用脚本不可见的函数，但它使这样做变得更加困难——就像所有与反黑客相关的工作一样。