APKiD
v3.2.0 open-sourceThe section your link pointed to isn't on APKiD's page any more, so we've brought you to the top.
APKiD identifies how an APK was made, detecting compilers, packers, obfuscators, and other characteristics of Android applications.
apkid -st target.apk apkid --print-filter=-is_apk,-is_signed target.apk apkid -st -j -m target.apk apkid --include-types dex sample.apk apkid.scan_file_obj(file_object) apkid test-data --typing filename apkid test-data --typing none apkid --output-dir ./reports /path/to/app.apk
Summary
APKiD is an open-source command-line tool that inspects Android APK and DEX files and reports the compiler, packer, obfuscator, or other build tooling used to produce them; its own README describes it as PEiDPEiDA free Windows utility that detects packers, cryptors, and compilers used on PE executables, helping analysts identify obfuscation before reversing a binary. for Android. It installs via pip or runs through a provided Docker wrapper, and it's aimed at malware analysts and reverse engineers who need to quickly triage a sample or identify app-shielding and RASP SDKs before deeper analysis. Its rule set covers a wide range of packers and protectors, from Denuvo mobile protection and Tencent Legu VMP to Zimperium's zShield/zDefend family, and it can detect signature schemes, compression tricks, and Dart or DLLDLLA Windows file format containing compiled code and data that multiple programs can load and share at runtime, letting cyber tools inject functionality into other processes or hook system calls. content inside an APK. First committed in 2016, it has 44 contributors and remains active, with 26 commits and 10 releases in the past year adding new detection rules.
APKiD identifies how an APK was made, detecting compilers, packers, obfuscators, and other characteristics of Android applications.
How APKiD helps
Which packer, protector, or obfuscator was used to build this sample?
matches the compiled DEX and APK against its rule set and names the specific tool, from Denuvo mobile protection to Tencent Legu VMP, so triage can start from what actually produced the file
Does this app ship an app-shielding or RASP SDK I need to work around before reversing it?
flags known shielding and RASP families such as the Zimperium zShield/zDefend line and Arxan, so their presence is known before deeper analysis begins
Which compiler actually produced this DEX file?
inspects the DEX content and reports the compiler, distinguishing standard toolchains from ones like R8, using its own compiler map
Is this APK's signature or compression scheme hiding something nonstandard?
checks the signing block for V2+ signature schemes and detects nonstandard compression such as XZ, surfacing tricks a sample might use to evade simpler scanners
Does this file contain Dart, DLL, or other embedded content that isn't plain DEX?
reports file-type detections such as Dart, DLL, and resource files found inside the archive, revealing content a normal APK wouldn't carry
Languages
Command line
No command matches.
| option | found in | since | description |
|---|
Values are placeholders taken from each option’s declared default. Nothing is executed here — the output shown is a recording of a run that already happened.
Score card
-
Shipping velocity releases a month, last 12 months
-
Documentation quality release-notes rubric, 0–100
-
Breaking-change discipline how rarely a release breaks users, and notice given
-
Maintenance risk quiet time against its own cadence, maintainers
-
Innovation & surface new capabilities, API and MCP surface
- Community health
-
Contributor trend distinct committers, this year against last
-
Maintainer concentration bus factor now against a year ago
-
Issue backlog trend issues closed per issue opened, 12 months
-
Responsiveness median time to a maintainer’s first reply
Nine scores for APKiD, each built from the releases, notes and API history this site tracks — and, on Researcher and Business, where it stands among every measured tool in its category and how that has moved.
Score cards are part of every paid plan.
See plans → Already subscribed? Sign in →Trajectory
Blank means never measured; nothing here is a filled-in zero.
Peer standings are included with Researcher and Business. See how this tool ranks against its competitors, using data we don't publish anywhere else.
See plans →Each score is 0–100 on a published rubric, derived from data this site already shows. A dimension we cannot measure says so — it is never scored 0 and never enters a rank.
How this is scored
- Shipping velocity — releases a month over the last 12 months, on a log scale where 16 a month scores 100. Needs 3 releases in the window.
- Documentation quality — the release-notes rubric published on the analytics page, unchanged.
- Breaking-change discipline — the share of releases carrying a breaking change (none scores 100, half or more scores 0). Only projects that label breaking changes are measured: a clean record cannot be told from an unlabelled one.
- Maintenance risk — quiet time measured against the tool's own release cadence (quiet longer than 90 days and three typical gaps scores 0), plus the number of active maintainers and whether contributors are growing, where known. Higher is lower risk.
- Innovation & surface — new capabilities in the feature ledger this year, API and MCP operations added, and the share of commits that are features: the mean of whichever we hold.
- Community health (open-source tools only) — each is a direction, not a size: contributors this year against last, the bus factor now against a year ago, and issues closed per issue opened, where steady scores 50, doubled 100 and halved 0; plus the median time to a maintainer's first reply (an hour scores about 100, a month or more 0). A commercial card has no repository and carries none of the four.
- Documented delivery (commercial tools) — when a vendor's documented new capabilities have slowed against its own baseline, that counts against the overall standing as heavily as two low dimensions. Steady delivery, or too little history to judge, leaves the standing alone; it is never a sixth score.
- Open-source tools are scored on repository signals; commercial tools on their published changelog. Ranks compare tools within one category and one profile and need at least five measured peers; the overall standing needs three ranked dimensions. Best-in-breed or consolidator is a shape, not a quality, and is never scored.
Release-note detail over time
See how much detail APKiD puts in its release notes, quarter by quarter, and compare it with tracked tools in the same category. This history uses up to ten retained, reviewed notes per tool; sparse or blank older quarters may reflect that limit.
Checking release-note history…
Coverage
Missing something? Tell us
What APKiD connects to, runs on and detects, read from its release notes and docs. So far: 3 updated detections, 2 new detections, 1 retired detection.
6 changes, tracked since Oct 21, 2026.
-
Oct 212026
new Tracker detections (Exodus Privacy)
With trackers
Implement trackers by @AbhiTheModder in https://github.com/rednaga/APKiD/pull/455
-
Oct 212026
updated Google Pairip / Play Integrity rules
Updated and added Google Pairip/Play Integrity Rules by @Myshtea in https://github.com/rednaga/APKiD/pull/496
-
Oct 212026
updated Protectt YARA rule
Update Protectt YARA rule with new sample and strings by @AbhiTheModder in https://github.com/rednaga/APKiD/pull/501
-
Oct 212026
new Dart >= 3.13 AOT export symbols rule
enhance: add rule for Dart >= 3.13 AOT export symbols by @hax0r31337 in https://github.com/rednaga/APKiD/pull/502
-
Oct 212026
retired dexguard_d rule removed
Remove deprecated `dexguard_d` rule by @FrenchYeti in https://github.com/rednaga/APKiD/pull/508
-
Oct 212026
updated Appdome rule improvement
improve appdome rule by @AbhiTheModder in https://github.com/rednaga/APKiD/pull/494
Nothing first seen in this window. That doesn't mean APKiD shipped nothing, only that we found no record of it.
How we count
Read from 1 of 9 release notes and docs updates we hold for APKiD. "First seen" is the earliest note that names something; "last" is the latest. Our history may start partway through APKiD's life, so an old integration can show a recent first-seen date.
Each change counts once: "added 40 checks" is one line, so the numbers measure how often coverage moves, not how big the catalogue is or how well it detects.
Releases
9 entries
No entries match these filters.
- October 20261
- April 20261
- April 20251
- April 20221
- November 20201
- June 20191
- July 20181
- March 20171
- September 20161
Project health
Issue, contributor and maintainer activity in rednaga/APKiD, 2023-10 – 2026-09, as of 2026-09-25. Twelve-month figures first; the trend lines run the whole window.
- Contributors 4 −2 vs prior 12 months
- Maintainers 1 +0 joined · −1 left, last 12 months
- Bus factor 1 committers behind half the commits
- Community-filed 79% of issues opened, last 12 months
- Median time to close 4.8 days first maintainer reply 3.3 days
- Open backlog 83 of 293 issues ever filed
- Issues opened / month 0 · 0 communitymaintainers
- Open backlog 83
- Contributors / month 1
- Commits / month 2
- Stars 2,574
- other 100%
Counts from the project's public repository and git history; no individuals are identified. Maintainers are the committers covering 80% of the last year's commits. how we measure this
Add the badge to your README
Maintain this project? The badge links readers straight to this page, so they can follow every release here.