> The Name property must be a fully qualified 'package.TypeName' value, and > no package was found for 'ab'. > > Java.Lang.Object subclasses only need to contain a package if their name > will be used in AndroidManifest.xml. (Android!!! /me shakes hand in air.) >
Thats the point - all my UI classes now should be out of obfuscation, making them easy target for an attacker. > Is it possible to do some 'normalization' of symbols when generating > .java - to support this? > > I'm not sure. Obfuscators can potentially rename ~everything (class names, > method names, field names). If your obfuscator were to process > Mono.Android.dll, it could then rename virtual methods in all subclasses; > I'm sure Obfuscating Mono.Android is difficult, moreover if you say it contais reflections with symbolic names. But obfuscation application classes is not a big problem. Right these classes are uncovered for an attacker. > The problem is the Mono.Android.dll implementation which looks up many > methods via Reflection, by-name, and if these methods are renamed then all > bets are off and things will break horribly. > It searches only API inherited methods ( overrides ) - but these methods are not be renamed by obfuscator - so thats fine. > so normalizing Java type names is something that could be done. Would that > be effective? I don't know. > This is exactly what should be done. Moreover, this can be treated as a bug. See this absolutely legal C# declaration: class @if Transformation into java by GenerateJavaStubs will definitely fail, because @if is not a java identifier (and formally, it should be 'if', not '@if') Therefore mapping and normalization in GenerateJavaStubs is needed, to totally conform both language specs. Igor
_______________________________________________ Monodroid mailing list Monodroid@lists.ximian.com UNSUBSCRIBE INFORMATION: http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/monodroid
