DOCSLIB.ORG

Host-Based Code Injection Attacks: a Popular Technique Used by Malware

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Host-Based Code Injection Attacks: a Popular Technique Used by Malware Host-Based Code Injection Attacks: A Popular Technique Used By Malware Thomas Barabosch Elmar Gerhards-Padilla Fraunhofer FKIE Fraunhofer FKIE Friedrich-Ebert-Allee 144 Friedrich-Ebert-Allee 144 53113 Bonn, Germany 53113 Bonn, Germany [email protected] [email protected] c 2014 IEEE. Personal use of this material is per- implemented with different goals in mind, they share one mitted. Permission from IEEE must be obtained for all common feature: they all inject code locally into foreign other uses, in any current or future media, including process spaces. One reason for this behaviour is detection reprinting/republishing this material for advertising or avoidance. However, code injections are not limited to tar- promotional purposes, creating new collective works, for geted malware. Mass-malware also uses code injections in resale or redistribution to servers or lists, or reuse of any order to stay under the radar (ZeroAccess, ZeusP2P or Con- copyrighted component of this work in other works. ficker). Detection avoidance is not the only advantage of us- ing code injections from a malware author’s point of view. Abstract Further reasons for using code injections are interception of critical information, privilege escalation or manipulation of Common goals of malware authors are detection avoid- security products. ance and gathering of critical information. There exist The above mentioned examples are all malware fami- numerous techniques that help these actors to reach their lies for Microsoft Windows. However, code injections are goals. One especially popular technique is the Host-Based platform-independent. In fact all established multitasking Code Injection Attack (HBCIA). According to our research operating systems (OS) are prone to HBCIAs. Malware 63.94% out of a malware set of 162850 samples use families such as Flashback (Apple Mac OS X) [16], Hanthie HBCIAs. The act of locally copying malicious code into (Linux) [14] or Oldboot (Android) [7] employ HBCIAs on a foreign process space and subsequently executing it is mobile and non-mobile operating systems. This fact shows called a Host-Based Code Injection Attack. that HBCIAs are present on mobile and non-mobile oper- In this paper, we define HBCIAs and introduce a taxon- ating systems today. HBCIAs are therefore a relevant tech- omy for HBCIA algorithms. We show that a HBCIA algo- nique for security researchers. rithm can be broken down into three steps. In total there In this paper, we examine the phenomenon of Host- are four classes of HBCIA algorithms. Then we examine a Based Code Injection Attacks (HBCIA) employed by mal- huge set of malware samples and estimate the prevalence ware in-depth. We describe the motivation for malware of HBCIA-employing malware and their target process dis- authors to use HBCIAs. We define HBCIAs and propose tribution. Moreover, we analyse Intrusion Prevention Sys- a taxonomy for classifying them. Several evaluations on tem data and show that HBCIA-employing malware prefers a large set of malware samples discover the prevalence of network-related processes for its network communication. HBCIA-employing malware, typical target processes and To the best of our knowledge, we are the first to thor- network communicators. oughly describe and formalize this phenomenon and give The contributions of this paper can be summarized in the an estimation of its prevalence. Thus, we build a solid foun- following three key points: dation for future work on this topic. (I) Formalization of Host-Based Code Injection At- tacks used by malware and its key components We derive definitions for key terms associated with 1. Introduction Host-Based Code Injection Attacks. By formalizing HBCIAs, we build a solid foundation for future re- Several reports have been published about malware search on this topic. families that operated for years without being detected (Uroburos, Careto or Stuxnet). Even though they have been (II) Proposal of a Host-Based Code Injection Attack algorithm taxonomy the attacker and the victim reside on different systems (Re- We examine the algorithms used for employing HB- mote Code Injection). CIAs and derive a classification scheme for them. We We define a Host-Based Code Injection as follows show that there exist four different classes. Definition 2 A Host-Based Code Injection (HBCI) is a (III) Prevalence estimation of Host-Based Code Injec- Code Injection, where the two entities inject and victim tion Attacks used by current malware reside on the same computer system. We estimate the prevalence of HBCIAs used by cur- rent malware based on a set of 162850 malware sam- inject injects code into victim typically with the help of ples. We show in addition that not all processes are the operating system. In this scenario, inject or victim can targeted equally and that such malware prefers a dif- be, for example, a user space process, a kernel module or a ferent set of processes for network communication. hardware device. In contrary to a Host-Based Code Injection, inject and 2 Code Injections victim reside on two different systems in a Remote Code Injection. That leads to Definition 3 for a Remote Code Probably the first code-injecting malware was the Morris Injection. worm [8] in 1988. It was able to infect large parts of the Definition 3 A Remote Code Injection (RCI) is a Code In- Internet by remotely exploiting a buffer overflow. jection, where the two entities inject and victim do not We discuss Code Injections and more specifically Host- reside on the same computer system. They communicate by Based Code Injection Attacks employed by malware in this means of a connecting channel. section. At first, the term Code Injection is defined. Then we define Host-Based and Remote Code Injections. After- For example, such a connecting channel can be a computer wards, we differentiate between Host-Based and Remote network. The injection is typically triggered by exploiting Code Injections and Host-Based and Remote Code Injec- a vulnerability in a network service. In such an scenario tion Attacks. inject would be a network client and victim a network ser- While Remote Code Injections Attacks have been inten- vice. inject sends a specially crafted payload containing sively researched (e.g. [18] or [25]), there is little research code to exploit victim. In case victim is vulnerable to this on Host-Based Code Injection Attacks. exploit, the code is executed within the scope of victim. 2.1 Code Injections 2.3 HBCI/RCI vs. HBCIA/RCIA In this and the latter sections, we define the term Host- Host-Based and Remote Code Injections are not mali- Based Code Injection Attack. We achieve this by develop- cious per se. There are legitimate uses for injecting code. ing a set of definitions beginning with simple Code Injec- These legitimate uses include hot patching [12], software tions. diagnostics [9], malware analysis [22] and debugging [19]. Firstly, we define a Code Injection as follows The Microsoft patent ”Method for injecting code into an- Definition 1 A Code Injection denominates copying of other process” also suggests benign use cases, because their code from an injecting entity inject into a victim entity ”invention relates generally to computer software diagnos- victim and executing this code within the scope of victim. tic tools” [9]. In general, injecting code is seldom a fea- ture that is needed by a common program in order to ful- For example, these entities inject and victim can be hard- fil its task. It is rather needed during application devel- ware devices or operating system processes. But they are opment. However, there is no way to distinguish between not limited to these examples. It is important to notice that Host-Based/Remote Code Injections and corresponding at- there are two crucial things needed for a Code Injection: tack versions without taking the purpose of the injection executable code and an execution context for this code. into account. Thus, we define a Host-Based Code Injection At- 2.2 Host-Based Code Injections versus tack/Remote Code Injection Attack as follows. Remote Code Injections Definition 4 If a Host-based Code Injection or a Remote The definition of a Code Injection does not specify the Code Injection serves a nefarious purpose, i.e. it has not place of residence of inject and victim. It can be distin- been intended by the original author of victim, then it is guished between two cases. The attacker and the victim called a Host-Based Code Injection Attack (HBCIA) or Re- reside on the same system (Host-Based Code Injection) and mote Code Injection Attack (RCIA), respectively. 3 HBCIAs from a Malware Author’s Point of 3.1.3 Detection Avoidance View Another reason for using HBCIAs is avoiding detection. If a user is suspicious, he might investigate the currently run- Host-Based Code Injection Attacks are an important ning processes. In case he finds a suspicious process name, technique for the successful operation of several malware he might kill this process. On account of this the malware families such as Citadel [21], Flame [2] or Flashback [16]. stops operating and the actor in-behind loses a valuable re- On the one hand, using HBCIAs comes with a lot of ad- source. But also automatic detection by security products vantages from a malware author’s point of view such as might be evaded. Once malware resides in a victim pro- privilege escalation or detection avoidance. On the other cess space, it blends into the behaviour of its victim. Hiding hand, a malware author has to meet additional challenges within another process space might enable malware to con- when implementing HBCIA-employing malware such as tinue its operation for an even longer period of time. One maintaining system stability or handling increased architec- example is the cyber espionage malware Flame.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Operating Systems and Virtualisation Security Knowledge Area (Draft for Comment)
    OPERATING SYSTEMS AND VIRTUALISATION SECURITY KNOWLEDGE AREA (DRAFT FOR COMMENT) AUTHOR: Herbert Bos – Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam EDITOR: Andrew Martin – Oxford University REVIEWERS: Chris Dalton – Hewlett Packard David Lie – University of Toronto Gernot Heiser – University of New South Wales Mathias Payer – École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne © Crown Copyright, The National Cyber Security Centre 2019. Following wide community consultation with both academia and industry, 19 Knowledge Areas (KAs) have been identified to form the scope of the CyBOK (see diagram below). The Scope document provides an overview of these top-level KAs and the sub-topics that should be covered under each and can be found on the project website: https://www.cybok.org/. We are seeking comments within the scope of the individual KA; readers should note that important related subjects such as risk or human factors have their own knowledge areas. It should be noted that a fully-collated CyBOK document which includes issue 1.0 of all 19 Knowledge Areas is anticipated to be released by the end of July 2019. This will likely include updated page layout and formatting of the individual Knowledge Areas. Operating Systems and Virtualisation Security Herbert Bos Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam April 2019 INTRODUCTION In this knowledge area, we introduce the principles, primitives and practices for ensuring security at the operating system and hypervisor levels. We shall see that the challenges related to operating system security have evolved over the past few decades, even if the principles have stayed mostly the same. For instance, when few people had their own computers and most computing was done on multiuser (often mainframe-based) computer systems with limited connectivity, security was mostly focused on isolating users or classes of users from each other1.
    [Show full text]
  • A Solution to Php Code Injection Attacks and Web
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH IN COMPUTER APPLICATIONS AND ROBOTICS Vol.2 Issue.9, Pg.: 24-31 September 2014 www.ijrcar.com INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH IN COMPUTER APPLICATIONS AND ROBOTICS ISSN 2320-7345 A SOLUTION TO PHP CODE INJECTION ATTACKS AND WEB VULNERABILITIES Venkatesh Yerram1, Dr G.Venkat Rami Reddy2 ¹Computer Networks and Information Security, [email protected] ²Computer Science Engineering, 2nd [email protected] JNTU Hyderabad, India Abstract Over the decade web applications are grown rapidly. This leads to cyber crimes. Attacker injects various scripts to malfunction the web application. Attacker injects these scripts to text box of vulnerable web application from various compounds such as search bar, feedback form, login form etc and later which is executed by the server. Sometimes attacker modifies the URL to execute a successful attack. This execution of system calls and API on web server by attacker can damage the file system and or leaks information of web server. PHP is a server side scripting language, dynamic features and functionalities are controlled through the PHP language. Hence, the use of PHP language results in high possibility of successful execution of code injection attacks. The aim of this paper is first to understand the code web application vulnerability related to PHP code injection attack, the scenario has been developed. Secondly defeat the attack and fast incident determination from the developed domain dictionary. This proposed system is helpful for cyber forensics expert to gather and analyze the evidence effectively Keywords: Code Injection, vulnerabilities, Attack, cyber forensics 1. INTRODUCTION The web environment is growing rapidly day by day, the cyber crimes also increasing rapidly.
    [Show full text]
  • Defeating Web Code Injection Attacks Using Web Element Attribute Mutation
    Session 1: New Moving Target Defenses MTD’17, October 30, 2017, Dallas, TX, USA WebMTD: Defeating Web Code Injection Attacks using Web Element Attribute Mutation Amirreza Niakanlahiji Jafar Haadi Jafarian UNC Charlotte University of Colorado Denver [email protected] [email protected] ABSTRACT injection and server-side script injection, they are still one of the Existing mitigation techniques for Web code injection attacks have most common attack vectors on Web applications; examples are the not been widely adopted, primarily due to incurring impractical recently discovered XSS vulnerabilities on Amazon [4] and Ebay overheads on the developer, Web applications, or Web browsers. [7] Websites. According to OWASP [21], XSS, the most prevalent They either substantially increase Web server/client execution time, type of Web code injection attacks, is the third Web application enforce restrictive coding practices on developers, fail to support security risk. legacy Web applications, demand browser code modification, or Methodologies for countering code injection attacks could be fail to provide browser backward compatibility. Moving Target De- broadly divided into two categories: (I) input validation techniques fense (MTD) is a novel proactive class of techniques that aim to that prevent injection of malicious code, but are highly suscepti- defeat attacks by imposing uncertainty in attack reconnaissance ble to evasion [23]; and, (II) code differentiation techniques that and planning. This uncertainty is achieved by frequent and ran- prevent execution of injected code, including BEEP [15] , ISR [17], dom mutation (randomization) of system configuration in a manner CSP [25], Noncespaces [27] and xJS [2]. However, as demonstrated that is not traceable (predictable) by attackers.
    [Show full text]
  • Arbitrary Code Injection Through Self-Propagating Worms in Von Neumann Architecture Devices
    Arbitrary Code Injection through Self-propagating Worms in Von Neumann Architecture Devices Thanassis Giannetsos1, Tassos Dimitriou1, Ioannis Krontiris2 and Neeli R. Prasad3 1Athens Information Tech. 19.5 km Markopoulo Ave. Athens, Greece 2Computer Science Dep. University of Mannheim D-68161 Mannheim, Germany 3Department of Communication Aalborg University Fr. Bajers Vej 7A5, DK-9220,Denmark Email: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] Malicious code (or malware) is de¯ned as software designed to execute attacks on software systems and ful¯ll the harmful intents of an attacker. As lightweight embedded devices become more ubiquitous and increasingly networked, they present a new and very disturbing target for malware developers. In this paper, we demonstrate how to execute malware on wireless sensor nodes that are based on the Von Neumann architecture. We achieve this by exploiting a bu®er overflow vulnerability to smash the call stack and intrude a remote node over the radio channel. By breaking the malware into multiple packets, the attacker can inject arbitrarily long malicious code to the node and completely take control of it. Then we proceed to show how the malware can be crafted to become a self-replicating worm that broadcasts itself and infects the network in a hop-by-hop manner. To our knowledge, this is the ¯rst instance of a self-propagating worm that provides a detailed analysis along with instructions in order to execute arbitrary malicious code. We also provide a complete implementation of our attack, measure its e®ectiveness in terms of time taken for the worm to propagate to the entire sensor network and, ¯nally, suggest possible countermeasures.
    [Show full text]
  • Study of Stenography and Forensic Analysis of Cyber Crimes Using Sql Injection Attack Viral Rajendrakumar Dagli, Surendranagar Dr
    Science, Technology and Development ISSN : 0950-0707 STUDY OF STENOGRAPHY AND FORENSIC ANALYSIS OF CYBER CRIMES USING SQL INJECTION ATTACK VIRAL RAJENDRAKUMAR DAGLI, SURENDRANAGAR DR. H. B. BHADKA, C U SHAH UNIVERSITY DR. K. H. WANDRA ABSTRACT Cyber Crime is normally comprehended to comprise of getting to a PC without the proprietor's consent, surpassing the extent of one's endorsement to get to a PC framework, changing or annihilating PC information or utilizing PC time and assets without appropriate approval. Cyber fear mongering comprises basically of undertaking these equivalent exercises to propel one's political or ideological closures. Psychological oppressor activities in the internet should be possible by confined people or fear monger gatherings, yet one state against another. By that, digital psychological warfare doesn't vary from other sort of fear mongering in any capacity. The particular idea of the risk can extend from forswearing of administration to listening in, extortion, damage, and robbery of licensed innovation and restrictive data. This paper expects to give a wide review of the difficulties looked by the world in digital wrongdoing and issues looked by law implementation organizations and Information and Communication Technology security masters in digital examinations and the advantages that might be picked up by the worldwide network and obviously the open private associations (PPP) to the anticipation, location and arraignment of digital violations and how underdeveloped nations need to keep pace with the consistently changing innovations and the control of this innovation by what we may term digital crooks so as to make benefit. Keywords: Cyber Crime, online frauds, SQL Injection INTRODUCTION Cybercrime is any crime that includes a PC, organized gadget or a system.
    [Show full text]
  • Revealing Injection Vulnerabilities by Leveraging Existing Tests
    Revealing Injection Vulnerabilities by Leveraging Existing Tests Katherine Hough1, Gebrehiwet Welearegai2, Christian Hammer2 and Jonathan Bell1 1George Mason University, Fairfax, VA, USA 2University of Potsdam, Potsdam, Germany [email protected],[email protected],[email protected],[email protected] Abstract just one of over 8,200 similar code injection exploits discovered in Code injection attacks, like the one used in the high-prole 2017 recent years in popular software [44]. Code injection vulnerabilities Equifax breach, have become increasingly common, now ranking have been exploited in repeated attacks on US election systems [10, #1 on OWASP’s list of critical web application vulnerabilities. Static 18, 39, 61], in the theft of sensitive nancial data [56], and in the analyses for detecting these vulnerabilities can overwhelm develop- theft of millions of credit card numbers [33]. In the past several ers with false positive reports. Meanwhile, most dynamic analyses years, code injection attacks have persistently ranked at the top rely on detecting vulnerabilities as they occur in the eld, which of the Open Web Application Security Project (OWASP) top ten can introduce a high performance overhead in production code. most dangerous web aws [46]. Injection attacks can be damaging This paper describes a new approach for detecting injection vul- even for applications that are not traditionally considered critical nerabilities in applications by harnessing the combined power of targets, such as personal websites, because attackers can use them human developers’ test suites and automated dynamic analysis. as footholds to launch more complicated attacks. Our new approach, Rivulet, monitors the execution of developer- In a code injection attack, an adversary crafts a malicious in- written functional tests in order to detect information ows that put that gets interpreted by the application as code rather than may be vulnerable to attack.
    [Show full text]
  • Operating Systems & Virtualisation Security Knowledge Area
    Operating Systems & Virtualisation Security Knowledge Area Issue 1.0 Herbert Bos Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam EDITOR Andrew Martin Oxford University REVIEWERS Chris Dalton Hewlett Packard David Lie University of Toronto Gernot Heiser University of New South Wales Mathias Payer École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne The Cyber Security Body Of Knowledge www.cybok.org COPYRIGHT © Crown Copyright, The National Cyber Security Centre 2019. This information is licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. To view this licence, visit: http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/ When you use this information under the Open Government Licence, you should include the following attribution: CyBOK © Crown Copyright, The National Cyber Security Centre 2018, li- censed under the Open Government Licence: http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open- government-licence/. The CyBOK project would like to understand how the CyBOK is being used and its uptake. The project would like organisations using, or intending to use, CyBOK for the purposes of education, training, course development, professional development etc. to contact it at con- [email protected] to let the project know how they are using CyBOK. Issue 1.0 is a stable public release of the Operating Systems & Virtualisation Security Knowl- edge Area. However, it should be noted that a fully-collated CyBOK document which includes all of the Knowledge Areas is anticipated to be released by the end of July 2019. This will likely include updated page layout and formatting of the individual Knowledge Areas KA Operating Systems & Virtualisation Security j October 2019 Page 1 The Cyber Security Body Of Knowledge www.cybok.org INTRODUCTION In this Knowledge Area, we introduce the principles, primitives and practices for ensuring se- curity at the operating system and hypervisor levels.
    [Show full text]
  • Sql Vulnerability Prevention in Cybercrime Using Dynamic Evaluation of Shell and Remote File Injection Attacks
    ISSN (ONLINE) : 2395-695X ISSN (PRINT) : 2395-695X Available online at www.ijarbest.com International Journal of Advanced Research in Biology, Ecology, Science and Technology (IJARBEST) Vol. 1, Issue 1, April 2015 SQL VULNERABILITY PREVENTION IN CYBERCRIME USING DYNAMIC EVALUATION OF SHELL AND REMOTE FILE INJECTION ATTACKS R. Ravi1, Dr. Beulah Shekhar2 Department of Computer Science & Engineering, Francis Xavier Engineering College, Tamil Nadu, India1 Department of Criminalogy , Manonmanium Sundaranar University, Tamil Nadu, India2 Abstract – Internet crime is a general term that includes crimes support data protection software to guard online, with all such as phishing, credit card frauds, bank robbery, illegal difficulty get an internet security program for your downloading, industrial espionage, child pornography, computer for today’s situation. Today, almost all new kidnapping children via chat rooms, scams, cyber terrorism, computer systems approach with some sort of security creation and/or distribution of viruses, Spam and so on has been programs installed. Try to create a password that consists of done through injection attacks. All such crimes are computer all combination of letters (both upper case and lower case), related and facilitated crimes. The different types of Internet crime including numbers and other special characters too. vary in their design and easy ability to be committed. Internet crimes can be separated into two different categories. Blackmail Password should be usually being changed regularly. There is an illegal act that has been given as a long-established new should not be any sharing of password with other people for weave in the new era. These may threaten to discharge security reasons.
    [Show full text]
  • Code Injection Attacks on HTML5-Based Mobile Apps
    Code Injection Attacks on HTML5-based Mobile Apps Xing Jin, Tongbo Luo, Derek G. Tsui, Wenliang Du Dept. of Electrical Engineering & Computer Science, Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY Abstract—HTML5-based mobile apps become more and more using different languages. If other OSes catch up to Android popular, mostly because they are much easier to be ported across and iOS, developers’ lives will become harder and harder. different mobile platforms than native apps. HTML5-based apps HTML5-based mobile apps provide a solution to the above are implemented using the standard web technologies, including HTML5, JavaScript and CSS; they depend on some middlewares, problem. Unlike native apps, this type of apps are developed such as PhoneGap, to interact with the underlying OS. using the HTML5 technology, which is platform agnostic, be- Knowing that JavaScript is subject to code injection attacks, cause all mobile OSes need to support this technology in order we have conducted a systematic study on HTML5-based mobile to access the Web. HTML5-based apps use HTML5 and CSS apps, trying to evaluate whether it is safe to rely on the web to build the graphical user interface, while using JavaScript for technologies for mobile app development. Our discoveries are quite surprising. We found out that if HTML5-based mobile the programming logic. Because HTML5, CSS, and JavaScript apps become popular–it seems to go that direction based on the are standard across different platforms, porting HTML5-based current projection–many of the things that we normally do today apps from one platform to another becomes easy and transpar- may become dangerous, including reading from 2D barcodes, ent.
    [Show full text]
  • EBOOK-Injection-Guide.Pdf
    1 INDEX What is Injection .......................................................................................................................... 5 Tainted Data Flow .................................................................................................................... 5 Injection Prevention Rules ...................................................................................................... 6 Injection Types ............................................................................................................................. 7 SQL Injection (CWE-89) ......................................................................................................... 10 LDAP Injection (CWE-90) ....................................................................................................... 13 XML Injection (CWE-91) ......................................................................................................... 15 XPath Injection (CWE-643) .................................................................................................... 16 XML External Entity Reference (XXE) (CWE-611) ................................................................ 18 Expression Language (EL) Injection (CWE-917) .................................................................. 20 OS Command Injection (CWE-78) ......................................................................................... 21 2 According to the OWASP Top 10 Application Security Risks (2017) . ... (https://www.owasp.org/index.php/Top_10-2017_Top_10),
    [Show full text]
  • Return-Oriented Rootkits: Bypassing Kernel Code Integrity Protection Mechanisms
    Return-Oriented Rootkits: Bypassing Kernel Code Integrity Protection Mechanisms Ralf Hund Thorsten Holz Felix C. Freiling Laboratory for Dependable Distributed Systems University of Mannheim, Germany [email protected], fholz,[email protected] Abstract In recent years, several mechanism to protect the in- tegrity of the kernel were introduced [6, 9, 15, 19, 22], Protecting the kernel of an operating system against at- as we now explain. The main idea behind all of these tacks, especially injection of malicious code, is an impor- approaches is that the memory of the kernel should be tant factor for implementing secure operating systems. protected against unauthorized injection of code, such as Several kernel integrity protection mechanism were pro- rootkits. Note that we focus in this work on kernel in- posed recently that all have a particular shortcoming: tegrity protection mechanisms and not on control-flow They cannot protect against attacks in which the attacker integrity [1, 7, 14, 18] or data-flow integrity [5] mech- re-uses existing code within the kernel to perform mali- anisms, which are orthogonal to the techniques we de- cious computations. In this paper, we present the design scribe in the following. and implementation of a system that fully automates the process of constructing instruction sequences that can be 1.1 Kernel Integrity Protection Mecha- used by an attacker for malicious computations. We eval- uate the system on different commodity operating sys- nisms tems and show the portability and universality of our Kernel Module Signing. Kernel module signing is a approach. Finally, we describe the implementation of a simple approach to achieve kernel code integrity.
    [Show full text]
  • Security Vulnerabilities of the Top Ten Programming Languages: C, Java, C++, Objective-C, C#, PHP, Visual Basic, Python, Perl, and Ruby
    Journal of Technology Research Security vulnerabilities of the top ten programming languages: C, Java, C++, Objective-C, C#, PHP, Visual Basic, Python, Perl, and Ruby Stephen Turner Known-Quantity.com, part of Turner & Associates, Inc. ABSTRACT Programming languages are like genetics, in that there are a few ancestors with common traits that have proliferated. These can be traced back over time. This paper will explore the common traits between the top ten programming languages, which runs almost 80 percent of all of software used today. These common traits are both good and bad. In programming, the bad traits equate to security vulnerabilities that are often exploited by hackers. Many programmers are not aware of these flaws and do not take the time to take corrective action as they build software applications. They cannot simply fix the problems at the end; they must continually adjust how they program throughout the process. This paper will also provide guidance on what can be done to make computing environments more secure. Chief information officers (CIOs) have a responsibility to oversee all aspects of software development, and should consider assigning a project manager familiar with the security challenges inherent with a particular programming language. A CIO should also sign-off at every stage, starting with system conceptualization, system requirements of the system, analysis of benefits, and scope of project. The business and system analyses are critical and must include security parameters for programmers in software requirement specifications. Once the planning and design stages are approved, unit development, software and system integration, followed by testing and retesting, are essential.
    [Show full text]