Reverse engineering starts with a simple question: what does this program actually do? The useful answer comes from observations that can be repeated, traced, and explained.
Begin with behavior.
Start by recording the inputs, outputs, and visible state changes. Keep each observation separate from the explanation you think might account for it. That distinction makes it easier to change direction when the evidence disagrees with the first theory.
Record the exact build, environment, and test case before opening the disassembler. An observation tied to a specific binary is easier to revisit than a note that only says “it seems to happen sometimes.”
“The most useful clue is often the gap between what a program appears to promise and what it actually does.”
Build a map.
Move from observed behavior into the binary’s structure. Identify the relevant functions, data paths, and trust boundaries, then connect each one to an observation. A small, accurate map is more useful than a large collection of unlabeled screenshots.
Keep the map small enough that every edge means something: a call that actually occurs, a value that actually flows, or a boundary the program actually crosses. Revisit the map whenever a new observation contradicts it.
Use AI carefully.
AI can help compare hypotheses, summarize unfamiliar code, or suggest where to look next. Each suggestion remains a lead until direct inspection and a repeatable test support it. The writeup should show that handoff clearly.
That sequence gives readers a way to distinguish the tool’s contribution from the researcher’s conclusion.
Preserve the trail.
A strong conclusion includes the conditions under which it holds, the evidence that supports it, and the limits of what was tested. When a result changes after one variable changes, say so. That is often where the most interesting explanation begins.
A useful research record lets someone else trace the path from behavior to code and back again. It names what was examined, what remains unknown, and which claims still need a repeatable test.