| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2003 10:48:12 -0700 From: Nicholas Weaver <nweaver@...berkeley.edu> To: Balwinder Singh <balwinder@....net> Subject: Re: Need help. Proof of concept 100% security. On Mon, Aug 18, 2003 at 08:54:54PM +0530, Balwinder Singh composed: > Hi All, > > I have developed an application, which I believe can provide 100% > security against various attacks.I can hear people laughing. Hmm.. > The applications is called Execution Flow Control (EFC). > Details of software can be found at http://203.197.88.14/efc You are doing system call monitoring based on a program model, and killing programs which deviate, assuming I read the documentation correctly... A: You have false positives unless you generate this database through program analysis or some other technique. "Security" procedures which make systems less reliable are only rarely acceptable. B: This has been done, based on program analysis, traces, and a whole host of other techniques. Probably the best example based on program analysis is "Intrusion Detection via Static Analysis" David Wagner and Drew Dean: http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~daw/papers/ids-oakland01.ps This is probably the nicest imply because their model does NOT have false positives, only false negatives. C: How to waltz through this "100%" protection: "Mimicry Attaks on Host-Based Intrusion Detection" David Wagner and Paolo Soto: http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~daw/papers/mimicry.pdf -- Nicholas C. Weaver nweaver@...berkeley.edu
Powered by blists - more mailing lists