Programs tend to provide a broad range of features, and different typologies of users tend to use only a subset of these features. For this reason, and because unnecessary functionality can be harmful in terms of both performance and security, recently we have witnessed an increasing interest in debloating techniques—techniques for reducing the size of a program by eliminating (possibly) unneeded features. Most existing debloating techniques tend to focus on program-size reduction alone, by producing a reduced program that behaves correctly for a provided set of inputs. Although effective with respect to their stated goal, these approaches ignore other important aspects of debloating and ultimately solve a simplified formulation of the problem. We believe that program debloating is a multifaceted issue, in which different, possibly conflicting goals must be considered and suitably accounted for. In this spirit, we propose a general approach that allows for formulating program debloating as a multi-objective optimization problem. Given a program to be debloated, our approach lets users specify (1) a usage profile for the program (i.e., a set of inputs with associated usage probabilities), (2) the factors of interest for the debloating task at hand, and (3) the relative importance of these factors. Based on this information, the approach defines a suitable objective function, so as to be able to associate a score to every possible reduced program, and tries to generate an optimal solution, that is, one that maximizes the objective function. To provide concrete evidence of the usefulness of our approach, we also present and evaluate Debop, a specific instance of the approach that considers three objectives: size reduction, attack surface reduction, and generality (i.e., extent to which the reduced program behaves correctly for the inputs in p’s usage profile). Our results, albeit still preliminary, are promising, in that they show that our approach can be effective in generating debloated programs that achieve good trade-offs between the different factors involved in the debloating process. Our results also provide insights on the performance of our general approach when compared to a specialized single-goal technique.