Re: Disassembler



"Alistair" <alistair@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1140964930.418112.96620@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Pete Dashwood wrote:
"CG" <carl.gehr.RemoveThis@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:4ba4a$44013727$453db2dd$15883@xxxxxxxxxxx
Alistair wrote:
Reading in comp.lang.asm370 I came across the following item which may
be of some interest:

<QUOTE>

On Fri, 10 Feb 2006 13:54:57 -0500, Gilbert Saint-Flour wrote:
<usenet5...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I found this page by accident a moment ago:
http://patents.nimblewisdom.com/patent/5946484-Method-of-recovering-source-code-from-object-code

It's a patent issued in 1999 by the USPTO for a disassembler, which
wasn't a
new concept back then (I've written my first disassembler in 1982).


The problem is that the language of patents is so arcane that it's
difficult
to spot the original elements of this patent, or if there's any
originality
in it at all. Hopefully, one of you will dig something up.



It appears to be more than just a dissassembler, based on the
generated

assembly code it looks for known patterns charateristic of the IBM
Cobol
compiler and attempts to symthesize the Cobol source, as nearly as I
can
tell in 5 minutes. But this has been done for many years, I am not
sure
what is novel here.

</QUOTE>

Perhaps there will soon be an answer to the perennial "Where can I
find
a cobol disassembler?"

This is not your typical disassembler. ["DisASSEMBLER" is probably a
misleading term.] If you look carefully, you will see that the patent
owner is Source Recovery Company. They turn executable code into
_COBOL_source_. That's a simplified description. They also will use
your
variable names in the generated source if you provide record
definitions.

Why would you need to disassemble something you have the source to? If
you
have the source fo the record definitions it is reasonable to suppose you
have the source of the programs...? Am I missing something here?

Yeah, the idea is that the source does not exist although the FD may.
This is a situation that I have come across in the real world where
project leaders have been known to delete libraries of source. His
nickname thereafter was 'Pete the Delete'.

Well, of course, if he was a Project Manager, he was obviously testing to
see if the DR procedures were in place and effective.... Quite right and
proper. And if his name was Pete he was definitely beyond reproach.

I have come across cases where the source was available, but the COPYs and
INCLUDEs weren't. (they hadn't been perceived as part of the source library
and were therefore stored separately, and later deleted.)

I still can't see much point in going to all the trouble of disassembling
code ifyou have the source. If you DON'T have the source, then disassembling
it is really not going to help much... Maybe, if it is absolutely Mission
Critical code and you really MUST amend it. Personally I wouldn't. I'd take
the opportunitiy to rewrite it. But then, in my case it would be component
based and I don't NEED the source anyway :-).

Pete.

Pete.


It is quite an effective technology. I've never heard of
anyone else claiming to be able to do this.





.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Disassembler
    ... new concept back then (I've written my first disassembler in 1982). ... to spot the original elements of this patent, ... compiler and attempts to symthesize the Cobol source, ... Because we looked at the executable code an not the source code as our first point of interest, our users could then match the executables with the source. ...
    (comp.lang.cobol)
  • Re: Disassembler
    ... new concept back then (I've written my first disassembler in 1982). ... to spot the original elements of this patent, ... compiler and attempts to symthesize the Cobol source, ... users could then match the executables with the source. ...
    (comp.lang.cobol)
  • Re: Disassembler
    ... new concept back then (I've written my first disassembler in 1982). ... to spot the original elements of this patent, ... compiler and attempts to symthesize the Cobol source, ... I have no direct involvement or interest in them. ...
    (comp.lang.cobol)
  • Re: Disassembler
    ... Pete Dashwood wrote: ... new concept back then (I've written my first disassembler in 1982). ... compiler and attempts to symthesize the Cobol source, ... variable names in the generated source if you provide record definitions. ...
    (comp.lang.cobol)
  • Re: Disassembler
    ... new concept back then (I've written my first disassembler in 1982). ... to spot the original elements of this patent, ... compiler and attempts to symthesize the Cobol source, ... variable names in the generated source if you provide record definitions. ...
    (comp.lang.cobol)