Home > Development, Review, Technology > Kindisoft SecureSWF

Kindisoft SecureSWF

Company: Kindisoft
Product: SecureSWF
Price: From $99

Kindisoft’s SecureSWF is the latest Flash obfuscator to go under the microscope (SWF Protector 2 and SWF Encrypt are reviewed elsewhere), so as the most expensive of the three (when considering the luxury versions), how does it stack up in terms of interface, functions, usability and stability?

Having downloaded the .zip file from the website, the first thing you notice is that there’s no installer. SecureSWF comes in a .zip file ready to extract and use without installation which has both pros and cons, though the benefits do outweigh the drawbacks. You can stick SecureSWF straight onto a USB drive like a portable app without worrying about whether or not it will run (assuming Java VM 1.5 is installed on the target machine), though if you believe in consistency you’ll have to manually stick the folder in your Program Files directory and create the relevant shortcuts in your Start Menu or favourite application launcher. As I said, the benefits do outweigh the drawbacks and I’m not suggesting that this is an issue – it’s just an observation.

So, after settling on where you’re going to run SecureSWF from, the next thing you notice after running the application is the number of options available. Compared to the other two solutions, there is a lot going on here (even the entry level SecureSWF has more options than both SWF Encrypt and SWC Encrypt combined), and it does seem a little daunting at first, but you quickly come to realise that it’s actually not that bad.

There are five tabs along the top – four of which contain settings and the last one is a status summary page. The fourth tab is just a rules page that overrides some of the options on the previous tabs, so in reality you have just three options tabs to familiarise yourself with rather than the initially anticipated five.

The first tab is the lightest on the options with just a SWF selection area, a list of presets to choose from and somewhere to specify the output location. You can select multiple files to import from the file browser (SWF, SWC and AIR formats – the others can only do SWF), though unfortunately there is no recursive import. There are five presets to choose from ranging from most- to least- aggressive, and a custom option should you want to tweak any of the presets yourself.

The second tab gets into more detail, allowing you to completely customise the level to which identifiers are renamed. Everything including local identifiers, labels, instance names, global variables and class members can be renamed to your exact requirements, and there’s even a tree structure that allows you to go in and select individual values. While this is great for offering the maximum level of obfuscation and the ability to make slight adjustments in the case of too many changes causing problems, I probably wouldn’t spend too much time here as it’s far easier to just let the presets take care of it all. Still, if I was in a situation where the maximum protection was available to me apart from one little identifier somewhere causing a problem, it’s nice to know that I can go in there and make the necessary change without having to sacrifice the security of the rest of the SWF.

The third tab offers code transformation, obfuscation, encrypted domain locking, SWF optimisation and literal strings encryption. The domain locking worked as expected, preventing my SWF from running anywhere other than this website and also from being run locally on my computer. Because I can only tell how well the other features are working by running them through a deobfuscator, I’m reserving those for another article that I’m working on which will be coming shortly.

Obfuscating a test SWF of 1,115kb, SecureSWF delivered a file of 1,156kb on maximum settings and 1,111kb on minimum settings – yes, it was actually smaller than the original. Obfuscation time was quick and on par with the others, and I experienced no crashes or freezes from the software no matter how hard I tried.

SecureSWF is a feature-packed obfuscator that not only works on Flash SWF files, but also SWC and AIR files as well. As the only obfuscator that works with these alternate file types, SecureSWF is really your only option when working with these formats. With regards to SWF files, the level of detail with which SecureSWF allows you to customise its obfuscation is significantly higher than that of SWF Protector 2, and an order of magnitude higher than that of SWF Encrypt.

One issue that always seems to come up in SecureSWF reviews is price. Yes, the fully-fledged bells-and-whistles version costs $400 which is significantly higher than either SWF Protector 2 or SWF Encrypt. However, the obfuscating methods, options and features available in this package – not to mention the fact that it will also protect your Flash components and AIR files – mean that you are getting a lot more here so naturally the cost is going to reflect that. I don’t really want to start comparing SecureSWF with its competitors here because this is supposed to be a review – not a comparison – but when one of the factors that could potentially put people off SecureSWF is its price when compared to its competitors, it’s difficult not to get sucked into such a comparison.

The bottom line is that SecureSWF starts at just $99, which is $151 less than SWF Encrypt and SWC Encrypt combined, but it offers more features than those two and does everything better. In light of that, even if price is an issue for you then SecureSWF blows SWF Encrypt out of the water having beaten it on options, features and price. Where things start to get interesting is when you compare SecureSWF to DComSoft’s $39.95 SWF Protector 2, but for that you’ll have to wait for my Versus feature which is coming soon.

In its own right, SecureSWF is a very impressive tool that is bursting with options and features. Due to the extreme levels of flexibility, it should be possible to tune every possible SWF file so that it’s protected as securely as possible without breaking any functionality. The fact that it allows obfuscation of everything from function names to labels and global variables to class members means that SWF files will be that much closer to being totally secure.

Out of 10, the usability and features on offer here have to command top marks, but I think the price of the professional edition could possibly push the application slightly out of reach for some lone developers. Yes, the Personal Lite Edition is only $99 but if you’re buying SecureSWF then you want the best version. Bearing the price of the professional edition in mind and the fact that a portion of its features are found in a product that only costs 1/10th as much, I’ve got to take a mark off. However, the wealth of additional options and features that you get for your money, their importance and the extra protection they bring to your work – plus the additional format support of course – mean that it’s just a single mark.

9/10

Coming soon: A review of how these SWF protectors stack up against SWF decryption tools.



  1. Rosario
    April 30th, 2010 at 08:09 | #1

    Thanks for the review. Very interesting.
    Looking forward to see comparison of the SWF protectors against SWF Decompilers.
    Somewhere I saw a comparative article about this topic … but can not find it.

  2. Rosario
    April 30th, 2010 at 09:09 | #2

    Probably my previous comment has been lost somehow(((

    Great, thanks… Interesting reviews. While I think that you are prejudiced treated SWF Encrypt in your review. :)
    Somewhere I saw a comparative article about this topic… but can not find it. I’ll let you know as soon as I remember.

    By the way, many people from the Flash Community prefer secureSWF, but at the same time many are of the opinion that it breaks flash games.

    Yep, $400 is a very “dear” price I think. 40$ is much more preferable). But I agree with one developer, who said on some forum threat that if the price is affordable, you may buy, but if it is expensive then just go and download it from torrents for FREE.)))))

    I think the public should know that regardless of the SWF protector that we use, there is always a way to crack the SWF file.
    And nobody needs to make a lot of effort to achieve this.

    All that needs to be done is download SWF Decrypt or SWF Reader… The first one can deprotect SWF Protector and SWF Encrypt. The second one can decrypt secureSWF (probably most of the readers think that secureSWF is unconquerable, but this is not true), SWF Encrypt, Mochiencryption and doSWF.

    SWF Reader is really cool… and there are lots of options. It’s developers initially based in Poland. The programm is freeware of course.
    SWF Decrypt more looks like someone’s part-project against SWF Protector and SWF Encrypt. It is free too.

    Personally I`m against such tools, but they have a right to exist.

  3. April 30th, 2010 at 10:32 | #3

    @Rosario

    Your first comment was automatically held in a queue until I authorised your email address.

    I’m not prejudice against SWF Encrypt at all – it’s just a poor product and is the most expensive of them all. How can I be positive about that?

    While you might say that $40 is preferable to $400, a) you get what you pay for; and b) it’s only the Professional Edition that costs $400 – the Personal Lite Edition costs $99 and still has more features than SWF Protector 2 and more than SWF Encrypt and SWC Encrypt combined. While we can all say we’d rather pay $100 for a Ferrari than $100,000, the real world is that the best products cost more money.

    I can’t support what you said about downloading from torrents. This practice takes money out of developers’ pockets and robs them of their good, honest work. Do you give your work away for free? I’d guess not – so why should others?

    > All that needs to be done is download SWF Decrypt or SWF Reader… The first one can deprotect SWF Protector and SWF Encrypt.

    Only until DComSoft release version 3 of their tool, and even before then, only AS3 projects.

    > The second one can decrypt secureSWF (probably most of the readers think that secureSWF is unconquerable, but this is not true), SWF Encrypt, Mochiencryption and doSWF.

    I’d be very sceptical about this because some of the obfuscation options in SecureSWF are irreversible. You *might* be able to open the SWF and look at the code, but the code will be so heavily obfuscated that none of it will make any sense and stealing it or making changes to it will cease to be a feasible option.

    > SWF Reader is really cool… and there are lots of options. It’s developers initially based in Poland. The programm is freeware of course.

    I searched for SWF Reader and found that it isn’t freeware at all. You can download a demo from their site, but the application itself costs €10.

    > SWF Decrypt more looks like someone’s part-project against SWF Protector and SWF Encrypt.

    I’d agree with you on that point – it seems that Magus is on a personal crusade, like he’s a disgruntled former employee or something. The guy should probably chill out a bit.

    > Personally I`m against such tools, but they have a right to exist.

    So you’re against them but you spent half of your post writing about them and advertising them? Interesting.

  4. Rosario
    April 30th, 2010 at 10:57 | #4

    >So you’re against them but you spent half of your post writing about them and advertising them? Interesting.

    I did not advertise them. Just some overview for people to know.

    >I searched for SWF Reader and found that it isn’t freeware at all.
    Ooops… You are right. Sorry.

    >and more than SWF Encrypt and SWC Encrypt combined
    SWC is just a zipped format of SWF. You may change extensions from .swc to .zip uncompress it and find the SWF file within. Then probably the SWF file could be simply obfuscated.

  5. Rosario
    April 30th, 2010 at 11:12 | #5

    Here is an interesting thing… I was browsing dcomsoft website, software screenshots and found that Mac version GUI is different from Linux and Windows…
    http://www.dcomsoft.com/images/screenshots/smb.jpg
    Weird, but there is a button “add SWF/SWC” on mac version… in other there is nothing about SWC. Going to install both version and test them.

    You reviews are very interesting, but it would be nice to mention about available OS platforms for each of the tools.

Spam Protection by WP-SpamFree

Security Code: