远程攻击的概率防御机制推理

Martín Ochoa, Sebastian Banescu, Cynthia Disenfeld, G. Barthe, Vijay Ganesh
{"title":"远程攻击的概率防御机制推理","authors":"Martín Ochoa, Sebastian Banescu, Cynthia Disenfeld, G. Barthe, Vijay Ganesh","doi":"10.1109/EuroSP.2017.30","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Despite numerous countermeasures proposed by practitioners andresearchers, remote control-flow alteration of programs withmemory-safety vulnerabilities continues to be a realisticthreat. Guaranteeing that complex software is completely free of memory-safety vulnerabilities is extremely expensive. Probabilistic countermeasures that depend on random secret keys are interesting, because they are an inexpensive way to raise the bar for attackers who aim to exploit memory-safety vulnerabilities. Moreover, some countermeasures even support legacy systems. However, it is unclear how to quantify and compare the effectiveness of different probabilistic countermeasures or combinations of such countermeasures. In this paper we propose a methodology to rigorously derive security boundsfor probabilistic countermeasures. We argue that by representingsecurity notions in this setting as events in probabilistic games, similarly as done with cryptographic security definitions, concreteand asymptotic guarantees can be obtained against realisticattackers. These guarantees shed light on the effectiveness of singlecountermeasures and their composition and allow practitioners to moreprecisely gauge the risk of an attack.","PeriodicalId":233564,"journal":{"name":"2017 IEEE European Symposium on Security and Privacy (EuroS&P)","volume":"80 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-01-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reasoning about Probabilistic Defense Mechanisms against Remote Attacks\",\"authors\":\"Martín Ochoa, Sebastian Banescu, Cynthia Disenfeld, G. Barthe, Vijay Ganesh\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/EuroSP.2017.30\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Despite numerous countermeasures proposed by practitioners andresearchers, remote control-flow alteration of programs withmemory-safety vulnerabilities continues to be a realisticthreat. Guaranteeing that complex software is completely free of memory-safety vulnerabilities is extremely expensive. Probabilistic countermeasures that depend on random secret keys are interesting, because they are an inexpensive way to raise the bar for attackers who aim to exploit memory-safety vulnerabilities. Moreover, some countermeasures even support legacy systems. However, it is unclear how to quantify and compare the effectiveness of different probabilistic countermeasures or combinations of such countermeasures. In this paper we propose a methodology to rigorously derive security boundsfor probabilistic countermeasures. We argue that by representingsecurity notions in this setting as events in probabilistic games, similarly as done with cryptographic security definitions, concreteand asymptotic guarantees can be obtained against realisticattackers. These guarantees shed light on the effectiveness of singlecountermeasures and their composition and allow practitioners to moreprecisely gauge the risk of an attack.\",\"PeriodicalId\":233564,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"2017 IEEE European Symposium on Security and Privacy (EuroS&P)\",\"volume\":\"80 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-01-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"2017 IEEE European Symposium on Security and Privacy (EuroS&P)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/EuroSP.2017.30\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2017 IEEE European Symposium on Security and Privacy (EuroS&P)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/EuroSP.2017.30","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

摘要

尽管从业人员和研究人员提出了许多对策,但具有内存安全漏洞的程序的远程控制流更改仍然是一个现实的威胁。保证复杂的软件完全没有内存安全漏洞是非常昂贵的。依赖于随机秘钥的概率对策很有趣,因为它们是提高旨在利用内存安全漏洞的攻击者的门槛的一种廉价方法。此外,一些对策甚至支持遗留系统。然而,目前尚不清楚如何量化和比较不同概率对策或这些对策组合的有效性。本文提出了一种严格推导概率对策安全界的方法。我们认为,通过将这种设置中的安全概念表示为概率博弈中的事件,与加密安全定义类似,可以获得针对现实攻击者的具体和渐近保证。这些保证阐明了单一对策及其组成的有效性,并使从业人员能够更精确地衡量攻击的风险。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Reasoning about Probabilistic Defense Mechanisms against Remote Attacks
Despite numerous countermeasures proposed by practitioners andresearchers, remote control-flow alteration of programs withmemory-safety vulnerabilities continues to be a realisticthreat. Guaranteeing that complex software is completely free of memory-safety vulnerabilities is extremely expensive. Probabilistic countermeasures that depend on random secret keys are interesting, because they are an inexpensive way to raise the bar for attackers who aim to exploit memory-safety vulnerabilities. Moreover, some countermeasures even support legacy systems. However, it is unclear how to quantify and compare the effectiveness of different probabilistic countermeasures or combinations of such countermeasures. In this paper we propose a methodology to rigorously derive security boundsfor probabilistic countermeasures. We argue that by representingsecurity notions in this setting as events in probabilistic games, similarly as done with cryptographic security definitions, concreteand asymptotic guarantees can be obtained against realisticattackers. These guarantees shed light on the effectiveness of singlecountermeasures and their composition and allow practitioners to moreprecisely gauge the risk of an attack.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信