4 ms·
Then the other software mitigations listed in the article are not so useful either, because the implementation (and OS, in the case of ASLR) could choose not to
by hayley-patton 3y ago
Then the other software mitigations listed in the article are not so useful either, because the implementation (and OS, in the case of ASLR) could choose not to use them, and the processor should execute such code too.
- mafribe 3y agoDefense works in layers: bounds checking is a programming language technique (although you can typically switch it off in (some) compilers). ASLR is an OS technique, which works even if bonds checks are switched off. IIRC at some point one OS (Debian?) had a bug in the randomness generation for ASLR, and it was easy to circumvent ASLR because of that.
- UncleMeat 3y agoAll you need to defeat ASLR is a data exfil so you can dump the process code. A great paper (https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/document?repid=rep1&type=pdf&doi=05c49820bb35d0b8d7a2168a9124e506a0334b57 https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/document?repid=rep1&type=pdf&d...) from about a decade ago created fully automated ROP against ASLRed processes (though it did rely on the fact that fork() didn't rerandomize on linux at the time).