Nyami vs PyArmor: A Technical Comparison
An honest feature-by-feature comparison between Nyami and PyArmor, covering obfuscation depth, anti-tamper, pricing, and ecosystem fit.
PyArmor is the most widely used Python obfuscation tool. Nyami takes a different approach: deeper per-module obfuscation, broader platform support, and a polymorphic build pipeline. Here's how they compare.
Obfuscation Architecture
PyArmor works by encrypting code objects and using a dynamic runtime loader (the "bootstrap") to decrypt them at import time. It supports script wrapping, binding to fixed machines, and expiration dates.
Nyami applies a full transformation pipeline before encryption: variable renaming, control flow flattening, MBA obfuscation, opaque predicates, junk code injection, decompiler breaking, then encrypts the result with polymorphic AES-256-GCM. Each build is structurally unique.
Anti-Tamper
Both tools include integrity checks, but Nyami adds marshal-level verification (via PyMarshal_ReadObjectFromString), anti-dump (memory zeroing of code objects via ctypes), and 11 anti-debug methods covering process, hardware, VM, timing, stack, and registry detection.
Decompiler Resistance
Nyami's decompiler_breaker module specifically targets decompiler AST recovery by corrupting EXTENDED_ARG chains, a technique most Python obfuscators don't use. Combined with control flow flattening and opaque predicates, Nyami's output resists all major Python decompilers including pylingual, pycdc, and uncompyle6.
Pricing
|---|---|---|
Which one should you choose?
Both tools are legitimate. The right choice depends on your threat model, budget, and deployment environment.
Ready to protect your own Python code?