mirror of
https://github.com/quasar/Quasar.git
synced 2026-04-25 23:35:58 +03:00
[GH-ISSUE #369] Renaming question #169
Labels
No labels
bug
bug
cant-reproduce
discussion
duplicate
easy
enhancement
help wanted
improvement
invalid
need more info
pull-request
question
wont-add
No milestone
No project
No assignees
1 participant
Notifications
Due date
No due date set.
Dependencies
No dependencies set.
Reference
starred/Quasar#169
Loading…
Add table
Add a link
Reference in a new issue
No description provided.
Delete branch "%!s()"
Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?
Originally created by @Rottweiler on GitHub (Sep 5, 2015).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/quasar/Quasar/issues/369
In http://github.com/quasar/QuasarRAT/blob/master/Server/Core/Build/Renamer.cs
What is this based off of? Like what in those namespaces isn't compatible with renaming?
@ghost commented on GitHub (Sep 5, 2015):
I started working on this, but if you wanted to look into it, load up the assembly in a .NET decompiler and you will see what is currently renamed. The namespaces won't be ignored when the design improves. Basically, any class that implements an interface that we don't have access to modifying (IDisposable) we need to ignore renaming the type, and the virtual methods that interact with the interface. I haven't determined what else we need to be careful of but if you want to delve into this go for it :P
Edit: Oh also, the types of packets need to be deserialized by the server correctly. I'm not sure if renaming the packet types will have an impact on the server, but I have a feeling it would.
Here is where I left off, if you, or anyone else decides to work on this.
@MaxXor commented on GitHub (Sep 5, 2015):
It should be more flexible now. Some classes had conflicts with renaming when they implement interfaces or override virtual methods.
@DragonzMaster commented on GitHub (Mar 14, 2016):
@StingRaptor you can see this as it might help you.
@yankejustin commented on GitHub (Mar 14, 2016):
@ghost I doubt the change in namespace would mess up deserialization. Perhaps serialization.
Honestly have not taken the time to look into why we need to exclude those namespaces. Would be nice to be able to remove it so we can allow users to obfuscate if necessary without issues . . .