I am several hundred opossums in a trench coat

  • 0 Posts
  • 23 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: July 1st, 2023

help-circle
  • Thank you for adding this! If people want a real life example of the effect shown in this pseudocode, here is a side-by-side comparison of real production code I wrote and it’s decompiled counterpart:

        override fun process(event: MapStateEvent) {
            when(event) {
                is MapStateEvent.LassoButtonClicked -> {
                    action(
                        MapStateAction.LassoButtonSelected(false),
                        MapStateAction.Transition(BrowseMapState::class.java)
                    )
                }
                is MapStateEvent.SaveSearchClicked -> {
                    save(event.name)
                }
                // Propagated from the previous level
                is MapStateEvent.LassoCursorLifted -> {
                    load(event.line + event.line.first())
                }
                is MapStateEvent.ClusterClick -> {
                    when (val action = ClusterHelper.handleClick(event.cluster)) {
                        is ClusterHelper.Action.OpenBottomDialog ->
                            action(MapStateAction.OpenBottomDialog(action.items))
                        is ClusterHelper.Action.AnimateCamera ->
                            action(MapStateAction.AnimateCamera(action.animation))
                    }
                }
                is MapStateEvent.ClusterItemClick -> {
                    action(
                        MapStateAction.OpenItem(event.item.proposal)
                    )
                }
                else -> {}
            }
        }
    

    decompiled:

        public void c(@l j jVar) {
            L.p(jVar, D.f10724I0);
            if (jVar instanceof j.c) {
                f(new i.h(false), new i.r(c.class, (j) null, 2, (C2498w) null));
            } else if (jVar instanceof j.e) {
                m(((j.e) jVar).f8620a);
            } else if (jVar instanceof j.d) {
                List<LatLng> list = ((j.d) jVar).f8619a;
                j(I.A4(list, I.w2(list)));
            } else if (jVar instanceof j.a) {
                d.a a7 = d.f8573a.a(((j.a) jVar).f8616a);
                if (a7 instanceof d.a.b) {
                    f(new i.j(((d.a.b) a7).f8575a));
                } else if (a7 instanceof d.a.C0058a) {
                    f(new i.a(((d.a.C0058a) a7).f8574a));
                }
            } else if (jVar instanceof j.b) {
                f(new i.k(((j.b) jVar).f8617a.f11799a));
            }
        }
    

    keep in mind, this was buried in hundreds of unlabeled classes and functions. I was only able to find this in a short amount of time because I have the most intimate knowledge of the code possible, having written it myself.


  • It’s not impossible, just very labour intensive and difficult. Compiling an abstract, high level language into machine code is not a reversible process. Even though there are already automated tools to “decompile” machine code back to a high level language, there is still a huge amount of information loss as nearly everything that made the code readable in the first place was stripped away in compilation. Comments? Gone. Function names? Gone. Class names? Gone. Type information? Probably also gone.

    Working through the decompiled code to bring it back into something readable (and thus something that can be worked with) is not something a lone “very smart person” can do in any reasonable time. It takes likely a team of smart people months of work (if not years) to understand the entire structure, as well as every function and piece of logic in the entire program. Once they’ve done that, they can’t even use their work directly, since to publish reconstructed code is copyright infringement. Instead, they need to write extremely detailed documentation about every aspect of the program, to be handed to another, completely isolated person who will then write a new program based off the logic and APIs detailed in the documentation. Only at that point do they have a legally usable reverse engineered program that they can then distribute or modify as needed.

    Doing this kind of reverse engineering takes a huge amount of effort and motivation, something that an app for 350 total sneakers is unlikely to warrant. AI can’t do it either, because they are incapable of the kind of novel deductive reasoning required for the task. Also, the CarThing has actually always been “open-source”, and people have already experimented with flashing custom firmware. You haven’t heard about it because people quickly realised there was no point - the CarThing is too underpowered to do much beyond its original use.







  • As a moderator of a couple communities, some basic/copypasta misbehaviour is caught by automated bots that I largely had to bootstrap or heavily modify myself. Near everything else has to be manually reviewed, which obviously isn’t particularly sustainable in the long term.

    Improving the situation is a complex issue, since these kinds of tools often require a level of secrecy incompatible with FOSS principles to work effectively. If you publicly publish your model/algorithm for detecting spam, spammers will simply craft their content to avoid it by testing against it. This problem extends to accessing third party tools, such as specialised tools Microsoft and Google provide for identifying and reporting CSAM content to authorities. They are generally unwilling to provision their service to small actors, IMO in an attempt to stop producers themselves testing and manipulating their content to subvert the tool.







  • Likewise, an open source project can totally die if they refuse to engage with the needs of the users. The lack of moderation and content management tools have been a longstanding criticism of Lemmy, and instances will migrate to alternatives that address these concerns. It is a genuine legal liability for instance operators if they are unable to sufficiently delete CSAM/illegal content or comply with EU regulations.