pyobfus vs Cython¶
Cython compiles Python to C. Obfuscation is a side effect of that, not its purpose, which shapes every trade-off below.
Cython compiles Python to C code, providing both performance benefits and obfuscation.
| Feature | pyobfus | Cython |
|---|---|---|
| Approach | AST transformation | Compile to C |
| Output | .py files |
.so/.pyd (platform-specific) |
| Cross-platform | Yes (single output) | No (compile per platform) |
| Build complexity | None | Requires C compiler |
| Development workflow | Unchanged | Compilation step required |
| Performance | Python execution model | Can accelerate suitable typed or extension code; benchmark your workload |
| Debug recovery | Private identifier reverse mapping | No equivalent pyobfus mapping workflow documented |
When to Choose pyobfus¶
- You need cross-platform distribution
- You want to avoid compilation complexity
- You need fast iteration during development
- Your users don't have C compilers
When to Choose Cython¶
- Performance is critical (CPU-bound code)
- You can handle per-platform builds
- You want binary-level protection
Part of the pyobfus tool comparison, which also carries the feature matrix, pricing, and the reasoning behind layering more than one tool. Its dated scope and disclaimer apply here as well.