A decompiler is a computer program that translates an executable file to high-level source code. It does therefore the opposite of a typical compiler, which translates a high-level language to a low-level language. While disassemblers translate an executable into assembly language, decompilers go a step further and translate the code into a higher level language such as C or Java, requiring more sophisticated techniques. Decompilers are usually unable to perfectly reconstruct the original source code, thus will frequently produce obfuscated code. Nonetheless, they remain an important tool in the reverse engineering of computer software.
The term decompiler is most commonly applied to a program which translates executable programs (the output from a compiler) into source code in a (relatively) high level language which, when compiled, will produce an executable whose behavior is the same as the original executable program. By comparison, a disassembler translates an executable program into assembly language (and an assembler could be used for assembling it back into an executable program).
Decompilation is the act of using a decompiler, although the term can also refer to the output of a decompiler. It can be used for the recovery of lost source code, and is also useful in some cases for computer security, interoperability and error correction.[1] The success of decompilation depends on the amount of information present in the code being decompiled and the sophistication of the analysis performed on it. The bytecode formats used by many virtual machines (such as the Java Virtual Machine or the .NET Framework Common Language Runtime) often include extensive metadata and high-level features that make decompilation quite feasible. The application of debug data, i.e. debug-symbols, may enable to reproduce the original names of variables and structures and even the line numbers. Machine language without such metadata or debug data is much harder to decompile.[2]
The places where register contents are defined and used must be traced using data flow analysis. The same analysis can be applied to locations that are used for temporaries and local data. A different name can then be formed for each such connected set of value definitions and uses. It is possible that the same local variable location was used for more than one variable in different parts of the original program. Even worse it is possible for the data flow analysis to identify a path whereby a value may flow between two such uses even though it would never actually happen or matter in reality. This may in bad cases lead to needing to define a location as a union of types. The decompiler may allow the user to explicitly break such unnatural dependencies which will lead to clearer code. This of course means a variable is potentially used without being initialized and so indicates a problem in the original program.[citation needed]
A good machine code decompiler will perform type analysis. Here, the way registers or memory locations are used result in constraints on the possible type of the location. For example, an and instruction implies that the operand is an integer; programs do not use such an operation on floating point values (except in special library code) or on pointers. An add instruction results in three constraints, since the operands may be both integer, or one integer and one pointer (with integer and pointer results respectively; the third constraint comes from the ordering of the two operands when the types are different).[6]
The final phase is the generation of the high level code in the back end of the decompiler. Just as a compiler may have several back ends for generating machine code for different architectures, a decompiler may have several back ends for generating high level code in different high level languages.
JD-Core is a JAVA decompiler written in JAVA. JD-Core is a standalone JAVA library containing the JAVA decompiler of "Java Decompiler project". It support Java 1.1.8 to Java 10.0, including Lambda expressions, method references and default methods. JD-Core is the engine of JD-GUI.
Someone I used to work for emailed me out of the blue and said they want me to update a VB3 (!!!) program I wrote for them because customers are reporting having problems running it under Windows 7. They have lost the source code (natch). Is there a decompiler for VB3?
DoDi's VBDIS3 it self is also written in VB3 - so about 10 years later just for fun I cracked it to make the decompiler to decompile it self.... and ported it to VB6!So now you've the source code !!! :D
Unlike the later versions which used native code and are generally not reliably decompilable, VB3 (and, I think, VB4) could be usually decompiled to almost original code. The keywords you need to search for are "DoDi VB3 decompiler" or "vb3dis". Here's a page that seems to have a copy.
Can you recommend a Java decompiler for Eclipse? My other questions is what restrictions is there for using a decompiled code from an other Java program? Illegal or what? I dont know much about licenses. Thanks for reading.
I have tried several decompilers and most of them have failed to produce a correct source for the applet I was trying to decompile (which was perlin/experiments/emotive-actors/, in case anyone wants to reproduce).
I used another decompiler DJ to help me work out what was wrong with the code decompiled by JD. But there were other things that DJ couldn't handle, so I guess a mixture of both decompilers worked for me :)
Structuring is the hardest part of decompiler development (at least for high level languages). That's a fairly simplistic algorithm, so it's a good starting point, but you'll likely want to use a better algorithm or make your own if you're working on a real decompiler.
I am searching for a decompiler for a C program. The binary is a 32-bit x86 Linux executable. Objdump works fine, so basically I am searching for something which attempts to reconstruct the C source from the asm source.
information is discarded in the compiling process. Even if a decompiler could produce the logical equivalent code with classes and everything (it probably can't), the self-documenting part is gone in optimized release code. No variable names, no routine names, no class names - just addresses.
I haven't seen any decompilers that generate C++ code. I've seen a few experimental ones that make a reasonable attempt at generating C code, but they tended to be dependent on matching the code-generation patterns of a particular compiler (that may have changed, it's been awhile since I last looked into this). Of course any symbolic information will be gone. Google for "decompiler".
I have the JD-eclipse-plugin installed. I want to decompile the classes within a jar-file. So I select the jar-file within Project-Explorer and click Decompiler in the Menu. However both decompilers (JAD and JD-core) are greyed out.
I don't believe there's a decompiler available for any version of LabVIEW. However, in older versions of LabVIEW (prior to 8, if I'm not mistaken) a compiled LabVIEW application was pretty much a ZIP file with all the VIs inside. Try renaming a copy of the application, replacing the .EXE extension with .ZIP, then see if you can look inside it. You might be able to get a list of all the VIs, and with some luck they will have been named in a way that gives you some clues. If you get this far, and you can identify and install the correct version of LabVIEW (probably including patch release), you might then be able to drop those VIs into the block diagram of a new VI. You won't be able to see the front panel or block diagram but you'll at least be able to identify the terminals of the subVIs and see the output with different inputs.
I see many reverse engineering lessons and every second person does reverse engineer using Ghidra decompiler and not disassembler as both are available in the same platform. I assume that reversing using decompiler is easy than disassembler(understanding the assembly of the code). Do I'm thinking right?let's say I'm using Ghidra then when should I see disassembler and when decompiler?Plus If we have now a free decompiler available in Ghidra then the need for a disassembler is gone and there is no need of understanding the assembly when we have a decompiler?
Although these terms are being used interchangeably, there is an intrinsic difference between disassembler and decompiler definitions traditionally. Let's first consider common steps involved in converting low level code to high level human readable code. This is similar to compilation where you convert high level code to low level machine code or an executable.
In my personal opinion, decompiler involves advance analysis and most importantly type and advance structure recovery for high level and user-readable representation. I'd personally use disassembler for analyses like symbolic analysis, code similarity or maybe something like fuzzing where actual high level representation may not be needed. And I'd prefer decompiler, when I'd like to interpret the underlying code or general working of the program. As program is better conceivable that way.
It depends on the reverse engineering, most use decompilers to speed up your work, this helps a lot to locate necessary calls, let's say you are at your job and need to quickly find an X algorithm to deliver your work, so if you were to use only one disassembler you would take much more work time analyzing and converting the small assembly instructions and equivalent high level code, decompilers are wonderful they simplify your life, but don't get stuck in that because it's not enough, let's say that in my example I find the algorithm sought with decompilers to obtain the operation closest to the desired one uses the disassembler and compares its analyzed pseudocode with the decompilers, all this to bring the maximum to the original, also depends on the work to be carried out, good studies.
a71949beef