2006
DOI: 10.1007/s11416-006-0011-3
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Anti-disassembly using Cryptographic Hash Functions

Abstract: Abstract

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
10
0

Year Published

2006
2006
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
4
2
1

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 7 publications
(8 reference statements)
0
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Note that the techniques presented here are rather trivial, compared to elaborate binary code obfuscation methods [30][31][32], but powerful enough to illustrate the limitations of detection methods based on static analysis. Advanced techniques for complicating static analysis have also been extensively used for tamper-resistant software and for preventing the reverse engineering of executables, as a defense against software piracy [33][34][35].…”
Section: Static Analysis Resistant Polymorphic Shellcodementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Note that the techniques presented here are rather trivial, compared to elaborate binary code obfuscation methods [30][31][32], but powerful enough to illustrate the limitations of detection methods based on static analysis. Advanced techniques for complicating static analysis have also been extensively used for tamper-resistant software and for preventing the reverse engineering of executables, as a defense against software piracy [33][34][35].…”
Section: Static Analysis Resistant Polymorphic Shellcodementioning
confidence: 99%
“…A special case of CKPE is hash-armoring [28]. Hash-armoring uses a cryptographic hash function with a context-based key to hash an (arbitrary) salt.…”
Section: Limitations Of Faithful Emulationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The possibilities in terms of exploiting user data include sending more convincing spam (Aycock, & Friess, 2006) and establishing markets for efficient sales of purloined data (Friess, Aycock, & Vogt, 2008). In terms of using the computing power of compromised machines, the output from cryptographic hash functions has been searched for useful values for anti-disassembly (Aycock, De Graaf, & Jacobson, 2006), and the computing power required to forge SSL server certificates has been estimated (Hemmingsen, Aycock, & Jacobson, 2007). This latter work brings up to date an earlier publication by White, looking at using computer viruses' application to distributed computing (White, 1989).…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%