c++ - Are there any downsides to using UPX to compress a Windows executable?

Question

I've used UPX before to reduce the size of my Windows executables, but I must admit that I am naive to any negative side effects this could have. What's the downside to all of this packing/unpacking?

Are there scenarios in which anyone would recommend NOT UPX-ing an executable (e.g. when writing a DLL, Windows Service, or when targeting Vista or Win7)? I write most of my code in Delphi, but I've used UPX to compress C/C++ executables as well.

On a side note, I'm not running UPX in some attempt to protect my exe from disassemblers, only to reduce the size of the executable and prevent cursory tampering.

question from:https://stackoverflow.com/questions/353634/are-there-any-downsides-to-using-upx-to-compress-a-windows-executable

Answer 1

The reason is there are downsides to using EXE compressors. Most notably:

Upon startup of a compressed EXE/DLL, all of the code is decompressed from the disk image into memory in one pass, which can cause disk thrashing if the system is low on memory and is forced to access the swap file. In contrast, with uncompressed EXE/DLLs, the OS allocates memory for code pages on demand (i.e. when they are executed).

Multiple instances of a compressed EXE/DLL create multiple instances of the code in memory. If you have a compressed EXE that contains 1 MB of code (before compression) and the user starts 5 instances of it, approximately 4 MB of memory is wasted. Likewise, if you have a DLL that is 1 MB and it is used by 5 running applications, approximately 4 MB of memory is wasted. With uncompressed EXE/DLLs, code is only stored in memory once and is shared between instances.

http://www.jrsoftware.org/striprlc.php#execomp