4 ms·
ARM is a bit more secure than x86 in that there's one unambiguous way to read a sequence of ARM instructions but with x86 you might have two entirely different
by Symmetry 8y ago
ARM is a bit more secure than x86 in that there's one unambiguous way to read a sequence of ARM instructions but with x86 you might have two entirely different but completely valid instruction sequences if you start reading at address FOO versus address FOO+1.
- ChrisSD 8y agoWhile that is nice I'm not quite understanding how this is a security issue? Can code reuse attacks exploit it?
- tbirdz 8y agoYes, look at ROP gadgets, for example.
- Symmetry 8y agoHere's an example http://mainisusuallyafunction.blogspot.com/2012/11/attacking-hardened-linux-systems-with.html http://mainisusuallyafunction.blogspot.com/2012/11/attacking...
- inetknght 8y ago> Actually, file descriptions. The description is the kernel state pertaining to an open file. The descriptor is a small integer referring to a file description. When we send an FD into a UNIX socket, the descriptor number received on the other end might be different, but it will refer to the same description.↩ Oh man, that perfectly explains a formerly-unanswered question I had about how that mechanism worked. Thanks for linking.
- beefhash 8y agoAnd then you have Thumb instructions. If you don't know if you'll stay in Thumb or ARM mode, you can still have weird instruction mixing.
- xvector 8y agoyou also have authenticated pointers in ARM which is a very significant advantage over x86