Best Protection: ASProtect 2 or Armadillo 4?

[LaBBa]

Well ... this is kinda hard to choose.. becuase ASPR is a better protection for bigger PE files and ARM is agood protector for 0day small PE files
so...
wich one is better ?
none i gess... becuase they both can be Unpacked...

*NOTE:
i recall that i saw an app writen in VB that the PE file was 50MB size and protected with Arm... it was runing real slow.. after i unpacked it i tried to see what would happend if it was Packed with ASPR.. it just run like it should be...

So..
From the protection point of view.. Arm is better...
From the User point of view... ASPR is better
From the CRACKER point of view... WHO CARE.. they both can be unpacked

Best to all

LaBBa

EXECryptor 2.x is more strong protection than AsProtect/Armadillo/other packers.....

Hi,
I'm agree with you , because till now I could not found any serial or patch for EXECryptor ver 2.x till 2.1.8 ... and the question : WHY ??
Their is a serial or patch for ASProtect and for others ... !!
Is it that strong ? or no one know about it ?

Other thing , while searching crackmes.de , I found a post for more than 2 months with no crack !! protected with EXECryptor !!

So, what do you think ??

buy that, share serial & than we will have serial..
in other ways, if there is no serial yet, so maybe no ones buy..

Asprotect > Armadillo
Reasons: it is more stable. Armadillo general idea is bad, ugly and slow.
Execryptor is completely another concept, but it can be reversed, though it is NOT that easy

Anything that adds ~430KB to EXE's I would consider ugly anyway ASProtect Overhead seems to be maybe 100K with a better compresion algo.

Thanks for all the replies. Since EXECryptor was mentioned a few times I gave it a good try and ended up purchasing both Armadillo, EXEProtector and the upgrade of ASProtect to v2.

I'll have to run some more tests to decide which one I'll use to protect the new versions of my software.

like a lot of others i will state the same thing: they both can be reversed, cracked, unpacked, and anything else. this goes for any self-decrypting protector. it's just a fact.

i would consider sticking with aspr simply because it will give your customers a more pleasing experience. aspr already offers what you need, mainly inline encryption of specific 'registered only' functions AND more importantly speed & stability. if you use this part correctly, then that's really all you need. sure, someone can card your program and release it, but that can happen with armadillo or any other protector as well.

i am a registered owner of a few apps that went to armadillo and i can't stand to use them now. slow startups, etc. (so i just have to unpack them to make them run better ) not to mention that sometimes these apps will just not run with a strange "general extraction error" msg. this may be because of olly running previously or something, but it's still a major inconvenience. just do a google search for ppl trying to run armadillo trial apps and never can.

i also own some aspr packed apps. i never unpack these (except just to peek under the hood). they startup quickly and run without issue.

i guess the point is to also consider the end-user experience before making your decision on anything. and also realise that ANY protection can and will be circumvented if someone with the talent wishes to do so.

ASProtect 2.0 is more difficult to unpack and restore IAT than ARMA.
EXECryptor is very good protector (it's nearly impossible to restore original code) but the apps, protected by this work very slowly.