Pros of Obfuscar

• Supports a wider range of .NET frameworks, including .NET Core and .NET Standard
• More actively maintained with regular updates and bug fixes
• Offers a more extensive configuration system for fine-tuning obfuscation settings

Cons of Obfuscar

• Less feature-rich compared to ConfuserEx, especially in terms of advanced protection techniques
• May have a steeper learning curve due to its more complex configuration options
• Slower obfuscation process, particularly for larger projects

Code Comparison

ConfuserEx configuration example:

<project outputDir="Confused" baseDir="." xmlns="http://confuser.codeplex.com">
  <module path="MyAssembly.dll">
    <rule pattern="true" inherit="false">
      <protection id="anti tamper" />
    </rule>
  </module>
</project>

Obfuscar configuration example:

<Obfuscator>
  <Var name="InPath" value="." />
  <Var name="OutPath" value="Obfuscated" />
  <Module file="$(InPath)\MyAssembly.dll">
    <SkipType name="MyNamespace.MyPublicClass" />
  </Module>
</Obfuscator>

Both tools use XML-based configuration files, but Obfuscar's syntax is more verbose and offers more granular control over obfuscation settings. ConfuserEx's configuration is simpler and more straightforward for basic use cases.

Pros of ConfuserEx (yck1509)

• More active development and recent updates
• Larger community and user base
• Better documentation and examples

Cons of ConfuserEx (yck1509)

• Less focus on modern .NET frameworks
• Some reported stability issues with complex projects
• Slower processing time for large codebases

Code Comparison

ConfuserEx (yck1509):

public static string Encrypt(string input, string key)
{
    byte[] inputArray = UTF8Encoding.UTF8.GetBytes(input);
    TripleDESCryptoServiceProvider tripleDES = new TripleDESCryptoServiceProvider();
    tripleDES.Key = UTF8Encoding.UTF8.GetBytes(key);
    tripleDES.Mode = CipherMode.ECB;
    tripleDES.Padding = PaddingMode.PKCS7;
    ICryptoTransform cTransform = tripleDES.CreateEncryptor();
    byte[] resultArray = cTransform.TransformFinalBlock(inputArray, 0, inputArray.Length);
    tripleDES.Clear();
    return Convert.ToBase64String(resultArray, 0, resultArray.Length);
}

ConfuserEx (mkaring):

public static string Encrypt(string input, string key)
{
    using var aes = Aes.Create();
    aes.Key = Encoding.UTF8.GetBytes(key);
    aes.Mode = CipherMode.CBC;
    aes.Padding = PaddingMode.PKCS7;
    using var encryptor = aes.CreateEncryptor(aes.Key, aes.IV);
    using var ms = new MemoryStream();
    using (var cs = new CryptoStream(ms, encryptor, CryptoStreamMode.Write))
    using (var sw = new StreamWriter(cs))
        sw.Write(input);
    return Convert.ToBase64String(ms.ToArray());
}

Pros of dnlib

• More focused library specifically for reading, writing, and analyzing .NET assemblies
• Actively maintained with regular updates and contributions
• Extensive documentation and examples available in the repository

Cons of dnlib

• Limited to .NET assembly manipulation, lacking obfuscation features
• Steeper learning curve for developers not familiar with low-level .NET internals
• May require additional tools or libraries for complete obfuscation solutions

Code Comparison

dnlib:

ModuleDefMD module = ModuleDefMD.Load("MyAssembly.dll");
foreach (TypeDef type in module.Types) {
    Console.WriteLine($"Type: {type.FullName}");
}

ConfuserEx:

ConfuserParameters parameters = new ConfuserParameters();
parameters.Project = new ConfuserProject();
parameters.Project.Add(new ProjectModule { Path = "MyAssembly.dll" });
ConfuserEngine.Run(parameters).Wait();

Summary

dnlib is a specialized library for .NET assembly manipulation, offering deep analysis and modification capabilities. It's well-maintained and documented but focuses solely on assembly operations. ConfuserEx, on the other hand, is a complete obfuscation solution that includes assembly manipulation as part of its broader feature set. While dnlib provides more granular control over assembly internals, ConfuserEx offers a higher-level API for obfuscation tasks, making it more accessible for developers primarily interested in protecting their .NET applications.

Pros of de4dot

• More actively maintained with recent updates
• Broader deobfuscation capabilities, handling multiple obfuscators
• Larger community and more extensive documentation

Cons of de4dot

• Primarily focused on deobfuscation, lacking obfuscation features
• May require more technical expertise to use effectively

Code Comparison

ConfuserEx (obfuscation):

var project = new ConfuserProject();
project.Add(new ProjectModule(new ProjectModule.Preset(), "path/to/assembly.dll"));
ConfuserEngine.Run(project).Wait();

de4dot (deobfuscation):

var deobfuscator = new DeobfuscatorInfo();
var options = new DeobfuscatorOptions();
deobfuscator.Deobfuscate("path/to/obfuscated.dll", options);

Summary

ConfuserEx is an obfuscator for .NET assemblies, while de4dot is a deobfuscator. ConfuserEx focuses on protecting code, whereas de4dot aims to reverse obfuscation. de4dot has a more active development cycle and broader deobfuscation capabilities, but it lacks the obfuscation features of ConfuserEx. The choice between the two depends on whether you need to obfuscate or deobfuscate .NET assemblies.