DOCSLIB.ORG

A Platform for Secure Static Binary Instrumentation ∗

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Platform for Secure Static Binary Instrumentation ∗ A Platform for Secure Static Binary Instrumentation ∗ Mingwei Zhang Rui Qiao Niranjan Hasabnis R. Sekar Stony Brook University Abstract instrumentations can be more easily and extensively opti- Program instrumentation techniques form the basis of many mized by exploiting higher level information such as types. recent software security defenses, including defenses against However, binary instrumentations are more widely applica- common exploits and security policy enforcement. As com- ble since users have ready access to binaries. Moreover, se- pared to source-code instrumentation, binary instrumenta- curity instrumentations should be applied to all code, includ- tion is easier to use and more broadly applicable due to the ing all libraries, inline assembly code, and any code inserted ready availability of binary code. Two key features needed by the compiler/linker. Here again, binary based techniques for security instrumentations are (a) it should be applied are advantageous. to all application code, including code contained in various Binary instrumentation can either be static or dynamic. system and application libraries, and (b) it should be non- Static binary instrumentation (SBI) is performed offline on bypassable. So far, dynamic binary instrumentation (DBI) binary files, whereas dynamic binary instrumentation (DBI) techniques have provided these features, whereas static bi- operates on code already loaded into main memory. DBI nary instrumentation (SBI) techniques have lacked them. techniques disassemble and instrument each basic block just These features, combined with ease of use, have made DBI before its first execution. DBI has been the technique of the de facto choice for security instrumentations. However, choice for security instrumentation of COTS binaries. Pre- DBI techniques can incur high overheads in several common vious works have used DBI for sandboxing [15, 17], taint- usage scenarios, such as application startups, system-calls, tracking [23, 28], defense from return-oriented program- and many real-world applications. We therefore develop a ming (ROP) attacks [11, 12], and other techniques for hard- ening benign code [16, 26]. This is because DBI platforms new platform for secure static binary instrumentation (PSI) that overcomes these drawbacks of DBI techniques, while provide several features that simplify instrumentation devel- retaining the security, robustness and ease-of-use features. opment, while ensuring their security: • We illustrate the versatility of PSI by developing several Non-bypassable instrumentation. DBI tools check every instrumentation applications: basic block counting, shadow control-transfer to ensure that the target is instrumented, stack defense against control-flow hijack and return-oriented and hence can block attempts to escape security checks programming attacks, and system call and library policy en- enforced by the instrumentation, e.g., by returning/jump- forcement. While being competitive with the best DBI tools ing to (i) data (code injection attacks), (ii) middle of an on CPU-intensive SPEC 2006 benchmark, PSI provides an instruction (typical ROP attacks), or (iii) into the middle order of magnitude reduction in overheads on a collection of of added instrumentation or past its end. real-world applications. • Completeness. DBI techniques instrument all executed code, regardless of whether they reside in executables or 1. Introduction libraries. The alternative of omitting library instrumenta- tion is unsatisfactory because the vast majority of code Program instrumentation has played a central role in exploit executed by today’s applications resides in libraries, and detection/prevention, security policy enforcement, applica- all of this code will remain unprotected. tion monitoring and debugging. Such instrumentation may • Ease of use. Instrumenting an application is as simple be performed either on source or binary code. Source code as prefixing its invocation with the name of a wrapper ∗ This work was supported in part by AFOSR grant FA9550-09-1-0539, program. There is no need to explicitly instrument the NSF grant CNS-0831298, and ONR grant N000140710928. application prior to its run, nor is there a need to know (and instrument) the libraries used by it. Moreover, DBI platforms such as Pin [19], DynamoRIO [8] and Valgrind Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or [22] provide a convenient API that greatly simplifies the classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation development of new instrumentations (also called tools). on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM Previous SBI techniques have lacked these features, and must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a moreover, were targeted at specific problems such as control- fee. Request permissions from [email protected]. flow integrity (CFI) [2] or software fault isolation (SFI) [32]. VEE ’2014, March 1–2, 2014, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA.. Copyright c 2014 ACM 978-1-4503-2764-0/14/03. $15.00. Consequently, they don’t address the issues in developing a http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2576195.2576208 general-purpose platform for binary instrumentation. Main Results and Contributions for determining library dependencies (e.g., ldd on Linux) We present a general-purpose binary instrumentation plat- cannot identify libraries that are loaded after an application begins execution. For a collection of popular real-world ap- form PSI that addresses the shortcomings of previous SBI techniques. It combines the benefits of DBI with the advan- plications, more that 40% of library loads occurred after the tages that are unique to SBI, including: commencement of application execution. To support seam- less instrumentation of such libraries, we have developed an • the ability to trade off increased (offline) analysis/instru- on-demand static instrumentation technique. mentation time for faster runtime performance, and Good performance across a wide range of applications • avoiding reliance on a potentially large and complex vir- tual environment at runtime We present a comparative performance evaluation of PSI against the two leading DBI tools, namely DynamoRIO and Moreover, PSI provides low overheads across a wide range Pin. We summarize our results below: of benchmarks, while avoiding some pitfalls of DBI plat- • BB counting on SPEC 2006. forms such as high application startup times and high over- PSI incurs an average over- heads for systems applications. Our key contributions are head of 69% on SPEC 2006 for basic-block counting, summarized below. compared with 53% for DynamoRIO and 97% for Pin. • Shadow stack. PSI’s overhead is less than a quarter of that Secure static instrumentation. Two key features needed reported by ROPdefender (18% vs 74%). for security instrumentations are completeness (instrumenta- • lmbench Microbenchmark. The average overhead of PSI tion should be applied to all code that can get executed) and is about 10 times smaller than DynamoRIO, and 200 times non-bypassability (instrumented code should not be able to smaller than Pin. bypass or subvert the added instrumentation). Many previ- • A collection of real-world applications. P I’s overheads ous SBI techniques, including Native Client [35], PittSFIeld S are about 7 to 13 times lower than DynamoRIO, and 60 [20], PEBIL [18] and many others [2,6, 14, 24, 36, 37], are times lower than Pin on several real-world applications, not complete for COTS binaries since they require additional including compilation, software updates, etc. information (such as symbol or relocation information) for correctly instrumenting binaries. Our PSI platform will be available for download from Among techniques applicable to stripped binaries, Reins http://seclab.cs.stonybrook.edu/download. [33] and SecondWrite [4, 13] don’t instrument all libraries. Scope and Limitations. PSI is a general platform for the Moreover, several of these techniques, including Dyninst instrumentation of COTS applications. It is targeted at be- [10], SecondWrite and Binary stirring [34], do not prevent nign COTS binaries that do not employ obfuscation. If a execution from escaping instrumentation since they do not binary employs obfuscation (as is common with malware), check the validity of targets such as return addresses. Al- our disassembly technique can fail to detect all of its code, or though our BinCFI [38] system performs such checks, it perform incorrect disassembly. However, since control flows implements a single hard-coded instrumentation, and hence are checked at runtime, PSI will block all attempts to exe- there is no general discussion or treatment of instrumenta- cute code that wasn’t disassembled and instrumented. Thus, tion non-bypassability. binaries employing obfuscation may fail at runtime due to A versatile, easy-to-use static instrumentation platform. control-flow transfers being blocked, but they won’t be able Our platform provides an easy-to-use API with convenient to bypass PSI. abstractions for low-level instrumentation, including data Similar to most SBI techniques, PSI does not support self- structures to capture instructions, basic blocks, and control- modifying code. In particular, any attempt to modify existing flow graphs. We illustrate the
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Dynamic Optimization of IA-32 Applications Under Dynamorio by Timothy Garnett
    Dynamic Optimization of IA-32 Applications Under DynamoRIO by Timothy Garnett Submitted to the Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Engineering in Computer Science Abstract The ability of compilers to optimize programs statically is diminishing. The advent and increased use of shared libraries, dynamic class loading, and runtime binding means that the compiler has, even with difficult to accurately obtain profiling data, less and less knowledge of the runtime state of the program. Dynamic optimization systems attempt to fill this gap by providing the ability to optimize the application at runtime when more of the system's state is known and very accurate profiling data can be obtained. This thesis presents two uses of the DynamoRIO runtime introspection and modification system to optimize applications at runtime. The first is a series of optimizations for interpreters running under DynamoRIO's logical program counter extension. The optimizations include extensions to DynamoRIO to allow the interpreter writer add a few annotations to the source code of his interpreter that enable large amounts of optimization. For interpreters instrumented as such, improvements in performance of 20 to 60 percent were obtained. The second use is a proof of concept for accelerating the performance of IA-32 applications running on the Itanium processor by dynamically translating hot trace paths into Itanium IA-64 assembly through DynamoRIO while allowing the less frequently executed potions of the application to run in Itanium's native IA-32 hardware emulation. This transformation yields speedups of almost 50 percent on small loop intensive benchmarks.
    [Show full text]
  • Dynamic Binary Translation & Instrumentation
    Dynamic Binary Translation & Instrumentation Pin Building Customized Program Analysis Tools with Dynamic Instrumentation CK Luk, Robert Cohn, Robert Muth, Harish Patil, Artur Klauser, Geoff Lowney, Steven Wallace, Kim Hazelwood Intel Vijay Janapa Reddi University of Colorado http://rogue.colorado.edu/Pin PLDI’05 2 Instrumentation • Insert extra code into programs to collect information about execution • Program analysis: • Code coverage, call-graph generation, memory-leak detection • Architectural study: • Processor simulation, fault injection • Existing binary-level instrumentation systems: • Static: • ATOM, EEL, Etch, Morph • Dynamic: • Dyninst, Vulcan, DTrace, Valgrind, Strata, DynamoRIO C Pin is a new dynamic binary instrumentation system PLDI’05 3 A Pintool for Tracing Memory Writes #include <iostream> #include "pin.H" executed immediately before a FILE* trace; write is executed • Same source code works on the 4 architectures VOID RecordMemWrite(VOID* ip, VOID* addr, UINT32 size) { fprintf(trace,=> “%p: Pin Wtakes %p %dcare\n”, of ip, different addr, size); addressing modes } • No need to manually save/restore application state VOID Instruction(INS ins, VOID *v) { if (INS_IsMemoryWrite(ins))=> Pin does it for you automatically and efficiently INS_InsertCall(ins, IPOINT_BEFORE, AFUNPTR(RecordMemWrite), IARG_INST_PTR, IARG_MEMORYWRITE_EA, IARG_MEMORYWRITE_SIZE, IARG_END); } int main(int argc, char * argv[]) { executed when an instruction is PIN_Init(argc, argv); dynamically compiled trace = fopen(“atrace.out”, “w”); INS_AddInstrumentFunction(Instruction,
    [Show full text]
  • Pin: Building Customized Program Analysis Tools with Dynamic Instrumentation
    Pin: Building Customized Program Analysis Tools with Dynamic Instrumentation Chi-Keung Luk Robert Cohn Robert Muth Harish Patil Artur Klauser Geoff Lowney Steven Wallace Vijay Janapa Reddi Kim Hazelwood Intel Corporation ¡ University of Colorado ¢¤£¦¥¨§ © £ ¦£ "! #%$&'( £)&(¦*+©-,.+/01$©-!2 ©-,2¦3 45£) 67©2, £¦!2 "0 Abstract 1. Introduction Robust and powerful software instrumentation tools are essential As software complexity increases, instrumentation—a technique for program analysis tasks such as profiling, performance evalu- for inserting extra code into an application to observe its behavior— ation, and bug detection. To meet this need, we have developed is becoming more important. Instrumentation can be performed at a new instrumentation system called Pin. Our goals are to pro- various stages: in the source code, at compile time, post link time, vide easy-to-use, portable, transparent, and efficient instrumenta- or at run time. Pin is a software system that performs run-time tion. Instrumentation tools (called Pintools) are written in C/C++ binary instrumentation of Linux applications. using Pin’s rich API. Pin follows the model of ATOM, allowing the The goal of Pin is to provide an instrumentation platform for tool writer to analyze an application at the instruction level with- building a wide variety of program analysis tools for multiple archi- out the need for detailed knowledge of the underlying instruction tectures. As a result, the design emphasizes ease-of-use, portabil- set. The API is designed to be architecture independent whenever ity, transparency, efficiency, and robustness. This paper describes possible, making Pintools source compatible across different archi- the design of Pin and shows how it provides these features.
    [Show full text]
  • An Infrastructure for Adaptive Dynamic Optimization
    An Infrastructure for Adaptive Dynamic Optimization Derek Bruening, Timothy Garnett, and Saman Amarasinghe Laboratory for Computer Science Massachusetts Institute of Technology Cambridge, MA 02139 fiye,timothyg,[email protected] Abstract ing profile information improves the predictions but still falls short for programs whose behavior changes dynami- Dynamic optimization is emerging as a promising ap- cally. Additionally, many software vendors are hesitant to proach to overcome many of the obstacles of traditional ship binaries that are compiled with high levels of static op- static compilation. But while there are a number of com- timization because they are hard to debug. piler infrastructures for developing static optimizations, Shifting optimizations to runtime solves these problems. there are very few for developing dynamic optimizations. Dynamic optimization allows the user to improve the per- We present a framework for implementing dynamic analy- formance of binaries without relying on how they were ses and optimizations. We provide an interface for build- compiled. Furthermore, several types of optimizations are ing external modules, or clients, for the DynamoRIO dy- best suited to a dynamic optimization framework. These in- namic code modification system. This interface abstracts clude adaptive, architecture-specific, and inter-module opti- away many low-level details of the DynamoRIO runtime mizations. system while exposing a simple and powerful, yet efficient Adaptive optimizations require instant responses to and lightweight, API. This is achieved by restricting opti- changes in program behavior. When performed statically, a mization units to linear streams of code and using adaptive single profiling run is taken to be representative of the pro- levels of detail for representing instructions.
    [Show full text]
  • Using Dynamic Binary Instrumentation for Security(And How You May Get
    King’s Research Portal Document Version Peer reviewed version Link to publication record in King's Research Portal Citation for published version (APA): Cono D'Elia, D., Coppa, E., Palmaro, F., & Cavallaro, L. (Accepted/In press). SoK: Using Dynamic Binary Instrumentation for Security (And How You May Get Caught Red Handed). In ACM Asia Conference on Information, Computer and Communications Security (ASIACCS 2019) Citing this paper Please note that where the full-text provided on King's Research Portal is the Author Accepted Manuscript or Post-Print version this may differ from the final Published version. If citing, it is advised that you check and use the publisher's definitive version for pagination, volume/issue, and date of publication details. And where the final published version is provided on the Research Portal, if citing you are again advised to check the publisher's website for any subsequent corrections. General rights Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the Research Portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognize and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. •Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the Research Portal for the purpose of private study or research. •You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain •You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the Research Portal Take down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact [email protected] providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim.
    [Show full text]
  • Coverage-Guided Fuzzing of Grpc Interface
    Niko Lappalainen COVERAGE-GUIDED FUZZING OF GRPC INTERFACE Master of Science Thesis Faculty of Information Technology and Communication Sciences Examiners: Marko Helenius Billy Brumley January 2021 i ABSTRACT Niko Lappalainen: Coverage-guided fuzzing of gRPC interface Master of Science Thesis Tampere University Master’s Degree Programme in Information Technology January 2021 Fuzz testing has emerged as a cost-effective method of finding security issues in many real- world targets. The software company M-Files Inc. wanted to incorporate fuzz testing to harden the security of their product M-Files Server. The newly implemented gRPC API was set as the target interface to be fuzzed. This thesis was requested to find a suitable fuzzing tool, and to verify that the tool could find and report issues. Another objective of this thesis was to determine a criterion for stopping fuzzing when adequate testing coverage has been achieved without having to run the fuzzer perpetually. To select a suitable fuzzing tool, some requirements had to be defined. Requirements and selection criteria were set based on the properties of the M-Files system as well as the target interface. Next, various fuzzing tool options were gathered from different sources. These options were validated based on the set requirements to select a short list of tools that could be analysed more closely. The suitable tool was selected from these based on their ease of integration and suspected performance. The coverage-guided WinAFL was evaluated as the most suitable from the considered options. The selected fuzzing tool was used to test M-Files Server in order to record its results.
    [Show full text]
  • Valgrind a Framework for Heavyweight Dynamic Binary
    VValgrindalgrind AA FramFrameweworkork forfor HHeavyweavyweighteight DDynamynamicic BBinaryinary InstrumInstrumentationentation Nicholas Nethercote — National ICT Australia Julian Seward — OpenWorks LLP 1 FAFAQQ #1#1 • How do you pronounce “Valgrind”? • “Val-grinned”, not “Val-grined” • Don’t feel bad: almost everyone gets it wrong at first 2 DDBBAA toolstools • Program analysis tools are useful – Bug detectors – Profilers – Visualizers • Dynamic binary analysis (DBA) tools – Analyse a program’s machine code at run-time – Augment original code with analysis code 3 BBuildinguilding DDBBAA toolstools • Dynamic binary instrumentation (DBI) – Add analysis code to the original machine code at run-time – No preparation, 100% coverage • DBI frameworks – Pin, DynamoRIO, Valgrind, etc. Tool Framework + = Tool plug-in 4 PriorPrior wworkork Well-studied Not well-studied Framework performance Instrumentation capabilities Simple tools Complex tools • Potential of DBI has not been fully exploited – Tools get less attention than frameworks – Complex tools are more interesting than simple tools 5 ShadowShadow valuevalue toolstools 6 ShadowShadow valuevalue toolstools (I)(I) • Shadow every value with another value that describes it – Tool stores and propagates shadow values in parallel Tool(s) Shadow values help find... Memcheck Uses of undefined values bugs Annelid Array bounds violations Hobbes Run-time type errors TaintCheck, LIFT, TaintTrace Uses of untrusted values security “Secret tracker” Leaked secrets DynCompB Invariants properties Redux Dynamic
    [Show full text]
  • Using Dynamic Binary Instrumentation for Security (And How You May Get Caught Red Handed)
    SoK: Using Dynamic Binary Instrumentation for Security (And How You May Get Caught Red Handed) Daniele Cono D’Elia Emilio Coppa Simone Nicchi Sapienza University of Rome Sapienza University of Rome Sapienza University of Rome [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Federico Palmaro Lorenzo Cavallaro Prisma King’s College London [email protected] [email protected] ABSTRACT 1 INTRODUCTION Dynamic binary instrumentation (DBI) techniques allow for moni- Even before the size and complexity of computer software reached toring and possibly altering the execution of a running program up the levels that recent years have witnessed, developing reliable and to the instruction level granularity. The ease of use and flexibility of efficient ways to monitor the behavior of code under execution DBI primitives has made them popular in a large body of research in has been a major concern for the scientific community. Execution different domains, including software security. Lately, the suitabil- monitoring can serve a great deal of purposes: to name but a few, ity of DBI for security has been questioned in light of transparency consider performance analysis and optimization, vulnerability iden- concerns from artifacts that popular frameworks introduce in the tification, as well as the detection of suspicious actions, execution execution: while they do not perturb benign programs, a dedicated patterns, or data flows in a program. adversary may detect their presence and defeat the analysis. To accomplish this task users can typically resort to instrumen- The contributions we provide are two-fold. We first present the tation techniques, which in their simplest form consist in adding abstraction and inner workings of DBI frameworks, how DBI as- instructions to the code sections of the program under observation.
    [Show full text]
  • Dynamic Data Flow Analysis Via Virtual Code Integration (Aka the Spiderpig Case)
    Dynamic Data Flow Analysis via Virtual Code Integration (aka The SpiderPig case) Piotr Bania [email protected] November 2008 "I'm all alone I smoke my friends down to the lter But I feel much cleaner After it rains" - Tom Waits, Little Drop Of Poison Abstract This paper addresses the process of dynamic data ow analysis using vir- tual code integration (VCI), often refered to as dynamic binary rewriting. This article will try to demonstrate all of the techniques that were applied in the SpiderPig project [15]. It will also discuss the main dierences between the methods that were employed and those used in other available software, arXiv:0906.0724v1 [cs.CR] 3 Jun 2009 as well as introducing other related work. SpiderPig's approach was found to be very fast and was transparent enough for reliable and usable data ow analysis. It was created with the purpose of providing a tool which would aid vulnerability and security researchers with tracing and analyzing any necessary data and its further propagation through a program. At the time of writing this article, it is the authors opinion that SpiderPig oers one of the most advanced solutions for data 1 ow monitoring. At the current state it works on IA-32 platforms with Mi- crosoft Windows systems and it supports FPU, SSE1, MMX and all of the IA-32 general instructions. Furthermore it can be extended to cover other operating systems and architectures as well. SpiderPig also demonstrates the usage of a virtual code integration (VCI) framework which allows for modify- ing the target application code at the instruction level.
    [Show full text]
  • Introspective Intrusion Detection
    UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, IRVINE Introspective Intrusion Detection DISSERTATION submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in Computer Engineering by Byron Hawkins Dissertation Committee: Associate Professor Brian Demsky, Chair Professor Michael Franz Associate Professor Athina Markopoulou 2017 Portions of Chapters 1, 2, 5 c 2017 IEEE Portions of Chapters 1, 2, 3 c 2016 ACM Portions of Chapters 1, 4 c 2015 IEEE All other materials c 2017 Byron Hawkins DEDICATION To the International Justice Mission for their enduring effort to protect powerless individuals from the malicious intrusions of the real world. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF FIGURES vii LIST OF TABLES ix LIST OF ALGORITHMS x ACKNOWLEDGMENTS xi CURRICULUM VITAE xii ABSTRACT OF THE DISSERTATION xiv 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Timeline of Important RCE Defenses . 8 1.1.1 Bug Fixing . 9 1.1.2 Traditional Intrusion Detection . 10 1.1.3 Control Flow Integrity . 12 1.1.4 Diversification . 14 1.2 Theoretical Advantages and Challenges of IID . 16 1.3 Goals of Introspective Intrusion Detection . 24 1.4 Usage Model . 29 1.4.1 Forensics . 30 1.4.2 Advanced Persistent Threats . 32 1.4.3 Field Debugging . 35 1.4.4 Profiling . 37 1.5 Prototype IID Implementations . 38 1.5.1 BlackBox for x86 COTS Binaries . 40 1.5.2 ZenIDS for PHP Applications . 42 1.6 Contributions . 44 1.7 Organization . 45 2 Paradise: a Hypothetically Pure IID 46 2.1 Platform Snares . 47 2.2 Generic Threat Model . 51 2.3 Deployment . 52 2.3.1 Generating the Trusted Profile .
    [Show full text]
  • Transparent Dynamic Instrumentation
    Transparent Dynamic Instrumentation Derek Bruening Qin Zhao Saman Amarasinghe Google, Inc. Google, Inc Massachusetts Institute of Technology [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Abstract can be executed, monitored, and controlled. A software code cache Process virtualization provides a virtual execution environment is used to implement the virtual environment. The provided layer within which an unmodified application can be monitored and con- of control can be used for various purposes including security en- trolled while it executes. The provided layer of control can be used forcement [14, 22], software debugging [8, 43], dynamic analy- for purposes ranging from sandboxing to compatibility to profil- sis [42, 45], and many others [40, 41, 44]. The additional operations ing. The additional operations required for this layer are performed are performed clandestinely alongside regular program execution. clandestinely alongside regular program execution. Software dy- First presented in 2001 [9], DynamoRIO evolved from a re- namic instrumentation is one method for implementing process search project [6, 10] for dynamic optimization to the flagship virtualization which dynamically instruments an application such product of a security company [22] and finally an open source that the application’s code and the inserted code are interleaved to- project [1]. Presently it is being used to build tools like Dr. Mem- gether. ory [8] that run large applications including proprietary software on DynamoRIO is a process virtualization system implemented us- both Linux and Windows. There are many challenges to building ing software code cache techniques that allows users to build cus- such a system that supports executing arbitrary unmodified appli- tomized dynamic instrumentation tools.
    [Show full text]
  • Efficient Cross-Architecture Hardware Virtualisation
    This thesis has been submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for a postgraduate degree (e.g. PhD, MPhil, DClinPsychol) at the University of Edinburgh. Please note the following terms and conditions of use: This work is protected by copyright and other intellectual property rights, which are retained by the thesis author, unless otherwise stated. A copy can be downloaded for personal non-commercial research or study, without prior permission or charge. This thesis cannot be reproduced or quoted extensively from without first obtaining permission in writing from the author. The content must not be changed in any way or sold commercially in any format or medium without the formal permission of the author. When referring to this work, full bibliographic details including the author, title, awarding institution and date of the thesis must be given. Efficient Cross-architecture Hardware Virtualisation Tom Spink I V N E R U S E I T H Y T O H F G E R D I N B U Doctor of Philosophy Institute for Computing Systems Architecture School of Informatics University of Edinburgh 2016 Abstract Hardware virtualisation is the provision of an isolated virtual environment that represents real physical hardware. It enables operating systems, or other system- level software (the guest), to run unmodified in a “container” (the virtual ma- chine) that is isolated from the real machine (the host). There are many use-cases for hardware virtualisation that span a wide-range of end-users. For example, home-users wanting to run multiple operating sys- tems side-by-side (such as running a Windows® operating system inside an OS X environment) will use virtualisation to accomplish this.
    [Show full text]