DOCSLIB.ORG

Subchapter B—Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Subchapter B—Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations SUBCHAPTER BÐFEDERAL MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY REGULATIONS PART 350ÐCOMMERCIAL MOTOR Basic grant means the funds available CARRIER SAFETY ASSISTANCE to a State for carrying out an approved PROGRAM State Enforcement Plan (SEP), which include, but are not limited to: Sec. (1) Recruiting and training of person- 350.1 Purpose. nel, payment of salaries and fringe ben- 350.3 Definitions. efits, the acquisition and maintenance 350.5 Policy. of equipment except those at fixed 350.7 Objective. weigh scales for the purposes of weight 350.9 Conditions for basic grant approval. enforcement, and reasonable overhead 350.11 Adopting and enforcing compatible costs needed to operate the program; laws and regulations. (2) Commencement and conduct of 350.13 State Enforcement Plan (SEP) for a expanded systems of enforcement; basic grant. 350.15 Certification of compliance by State. (3) Establishment of an effective out- 350.17 Maintenance of effort. of-service and compliance enforcement 350.19 Grant application submission. system; and 350.21 Distribution of funds. (4) Retraining and replacing staff and 350.23 Acceptance of State plan. equipment. 350.25 Effect of failure to submit a satisfac- Commercial motor vehicle means any tory State plan. self-propelled or towed vehicle used on 350.27 Procedure for withdrawal of approval. 350.29 Eligible costs. the public highways in commerce to transport passengers or property when: APPENDIX A TO PART 350ÐGUIDELINES TO BE USED IN PREPARING STATE ENFORCEMENT (1) The vehicle has a gross vehicle PLAN weight rating or gross combination APPENDIX B TO PART 350ÐFORM OF STATE weight rating of 10,001 or more pounds; CERTIFICATION or APPENDIX C TO PART 350ÐTOLERANCE GUIDE- (2) The vehicle is designed to trans- LINES FOR ADOPTING COMPATIBLE STATE port more than 15 passengers, including RULES AND REGULATIONS the driver; or AUTHORITY: 49 U.S.C. 31101±31104, 31108, (3) The vehicle is used in the trans- 31136, 31140±31141, 31161, 31310±31311, 31502; and portation of hazardous materials in 49 CFR 1.48. quantities requiring placarding under SOURCE: 57 FR 40956, Sept. 8, 1992, unless regulations issued by the Secretary of otherwise noted. Transportation pursuant to the author- ity of the Hazardous Material Trans- § 350.1 Purpose. portation Act, as amended (49 U.S.C. The purpose of this part is to pre- app. 1801 et seq.). scribe requirements for Federal assist- Compatible or compatibility means, in ance to States for programs to adopt relation to State laws and regulations and enforce Federal rules, regulations, pertaining to commercial motor vehi- standards and orders applicable to cle safety, having the same effect as commercial motor vehicle safety or the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regu- compatible State rules, regulations, lations (FMCSR) or Federal Hazardous standards and orders. Materials Regulations (FHMR) in that those State rules are either identical § 350.3 Definitions. or fall within the tolerance guidelines As used in this part: in appendix C to this part. Administrator means the Federal Motor carrier has the same meaning Highway Administrator. such term has in § 390.5. Basic allocation means only those State means a State of the United Federal funds distributed by the alloca- States, the District of Columbia, the tion formula, or the minimum funding Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the level specified in this part. Virgin Islands, American Samoa, 581 VerDate 23<NOV>98 13:41 Dec 03, 1998 Jkt 179205 PO 00000 Frm 00575 Fmt 8010 Sfmt 8010 Y:\SGML\179202T.XXX pfrm08 PsN: 179202T § 350.5 49 CFR Ch. III (10±1±98 Edition) Guam, or the Commonwealth of the FHWA, will serve as the basis for mon- Northern Marianas. itoring and evaluating performance of the State under the grant, and will be [57 FR 40956, Sept. 8, 1992, as amended at 60 FR 38743, July 28, 1995] resubmitted, with revisions as nec- essary, in applications for reapproval § 350.5 Policy. in following years. The Federal Highway Administration (c) The SEP shall designate the lead (FHWA) policy is to encourage each State agency responsible for admin- State to enforce uniform motor carrier istering the plan for the State. safety and hazardous materials regula- (d) The agencies named to perform tions for both interstate and intrastate functions under the plan shall have the motor carriers and drivers. The re- legal authority, resources, and quali- quirements for compliance with safety fied personnel necessary to enforce the standards in one State should be com- FMCSR and FHMR or compatible State patible with the requirements in an- rules at the time the State implements other State. A coordinated program of the approved SEP. inspection and enforcement activities (e) The State shall allocate adequate is needed to avoid duplication of effort, funds for the administration of the to promote compliance with uniform SEP and the enforcement of the safety requirements by all types of FMCSR and FHMR or compatible State motor carriers, and to provide a basis rules. for sanctioning carriers for poor safety (f) State laws shall provide for right performance. of entry and inspection adequate to carry out the SEP and provide that the § 350.7 Objective. State will grant maximum reciprocity The objective of the Motor Carrier for inspections conducted pursuant to Safety Assistance Program (MCSAP) is the North American Uniform Driver/ to reduce the number and severity of Vehicle Inspection standard, through accidents and hazardous materials inci- the use of a nationally accepted system dents involving commercial motor ve- allowing ready identification of pre- hicles by substantially increasing the viously inspected commercial motor level and effectiveness of enforcement vehicles. activity and the likelihood that safety (g) The State shall certify that it will defects, driver deficiencies and unsafe maintain its aggregate expenditure of carrier practices will be detected and funds by the State and political sub- corrected. divisions thereof, exclusive of Federal funds, for commercial motor vehicle § 350.9 Conditions for basic grant ap- safety programs and related programs proval. eligible for funding under this part, as (a) The State shall agree to adopt, required by § 350.17 of this part. and to assume responsibility for en- (h) The State shall agree to prepare forcing the Federal Motor Carrier Safe- and submit all reports required in con- ty Regulations (FMCSR) (49 CFR parts nection with the SEP or other condi- 390 through 399, except as may be de- tions of the grant to the FHWA upon termined by the Administrator to be request. inapplicable to a State enforcement (i) The lead State agency shall agree program) including highway related to adopt such uniform reporting re- portions of the Federal Hazardous Ma- quirements and use such uniform forms terials Regulations (FHMR) (49 CFR to record work activities performed parts 107, 171±173, 177, 178 and 180), or under the SEP as may be established compatible State rules, regulations, and required by the FHWA. standards, and orders applicable to (j) The State shall require registrants motor carrier safety, including high- of commercial motor vehicles to de- way transportation of hazardous mate- clare, at the time of registration, rials. knowledge of the FMCSR and FHMR or (b) The State shall submit a State compatible State rules, as applicable. Enforcement Plan (SEP) for the con- (k) The statutory authority of the duct of an effective safety program. State to regulate motor carriers shall Such plan, upon acceptance by the extend to private motor carriers of 582 VerDate 23<NOV>98 13:41 Dec 03, 1998 Jkt 179205 PO 00000 Frm 00576 Fmt 8010 Sfmt 8010 Y:\SGML\179202T.XXX pfrm08 PsN: 179202T Federal Highway Administration, DOT § 350.11 property as well as for-hire motor car- lations, standards, or orders in relation riers. to the FMCSR and FHMR. (l) The State shall ensure that com- (c) State laws and regulations per- mercial motor vehicle size and weight taining to commercial motor vehicle enforcement, drug interdiction, and safety in interstate commerce are also traffic enforcement activities funded subject to preemption under the provi- under this program will not diminish sions of § 355.25 of this chapter. the effectiveness of other commercial (d) State laws and regulations that motor vehicle safety enforcement pro- are not identical to the FMCSR or grams. FHMR will be deemed compatible for (m) The State shall take appropriate purposes of this part only if they are steps to ensure that fines imposed and within the variances permitted under collected by the State for violations the tolerance guidelines in appendix C will be reasonable and appropriate and, of this part. to the maximum extent practicable, (e) No State shall implement any will seek to implement into law and changes to a State law or regulation practice the recommended fine sched- which makes that or any other law or ule published by the Commercial Vehi- regulation incompatible under this sec- cle Safety Alliance. tion. (n) The State will participate in the SAFETYNET no later than January 1, (f) As soon as practical after the ef- 1994. fective date of any amendment to the (o) The State will undertake efforts FMCSR or FHMR, but no longer than to emphasize and improve enforcement three years, the applicable State law or of State and local traffic laws as they regulation must be adopted or amended pertain to commercial motor vehicle in such manner as makes it compatible safety. with the amended Federal provision. (p) The State will ensure comprehen- (g) Any State may apply for a vari- sive enforcement and reinspection of ance related to State laws, regulations vehicles and drivers placed out of serv- or enforcement practices pertaining to ice to verify compliance with lawful or- commercial motor vehicle safety in ders and the correction of all violations intrastate commerce, which shall be cited on roadside inspection reports.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Software Tamperproofing
    Software Tamperproofing7 To tamperproof a program is to ensure that it “executes as intended,” even in the presence of an adversary who tries to disrupt, monitor, or change the execution. Note that this is different from obfuscation, where the intent is to make it difficult for the attacker to understand the program. In practice, the boundary between tam- perproofing and obfuscation is a blurry one: A program that is harder to understand because it’s been obfuscated ought also be more difficult to modify! For example, an attacker who can’t find the decrypt() function in a DRM media player because it’s been thoroughly obfuscated also won’t be able to modify it or even monitor it by setting a breakpoint on it. The dynamic obfuscation algorithms in Chapter 6 (Dynamic Obfuscation), in particular, have often been used to prevent tampering. In this book, we take the view that a pure tamperproofing algorithm not only makes tampering difficult but is also able to detect when tampering has occurred and to respond to the attack by in some way punishing the user. In practice, tamperproofing is always combined with obfuscation: 1. If you both obfuscate and tamperproof your code, an attacker who, in spite of the tamperproofing, is able to extract the code still has to de-obfuscate it in order to understand it; 2. Code that you insert to test for tampering or effect a response to tampering must be obfuscated in order to prevent the attacker from easily discovering it. 401 402 Software Tamperproofing Watermarking and tamperproofing are also related.
    [Show full text]
  • Demystifying Anti-Repackaging on Android a ∗ a a a Alessio Merlo , , Antonio Ruggia , Luigi Sciolla and Luca Verderame
    You Shall not Repackage! Demystifying Anti-Repackaging on Android a < a a a Alessio Merlo , , Antonio Ruggia , Luigi Sciolla and Luca Verderame aDIBRIS - University of Genoa, Via Dodecaneso, 35, I-16146, Genoa, Italy. ARTICLEINFO ABSTRACT Keywords: App repackaging refers to the practice of customizing an existing mobile app and redistributing Android Security it in the wild. In this way, the attacker aims to force some mobile users to install the repackaged App Security (likely malicious) app instead of the original one. This phenomenon strongly affects Android, Anti-repackaging techniques where apps are available on public stores, and the only requirement for an app to execute properly Attacks to Anti-repackaging is to be digitally signed. Anti-tampering Anti-repackaging techniques try counteracting this attack by adding logical controls in the app at compile-time. Such controls activate in case of repackaging and lead the repackaged app to fail at runtime. On the other side, the attacker must detect and bypass the controls to repackage safely. The high-availability of working repackaged apps in the Android ecosystem suggests that the attacker’s side is winning. In this respect, this paper aims to bring out the main issues of the current anti-repackaging approaches. The contribution of the paper is three-fold: 1) analyze the weaknesses of the current state-of-the-art anti-repackaging schemes (i.e., Self-Protection through Dex Encryption, AppIS, SSN, SDC, BombDroid, and NRP), 2) summarize the main attack vectors to anti-repackaging techniques composing those schemes, and 3) show how such attack vectors allow circumventing the current proposals.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 321 Motor Vehicles and Law of the Road
    1 MOTOR VEHICLES AND LAW OF THE ROAD, Ch 321 CHAPTER 321 MOTOR VEHICLES AND LAW OF THE ROAD Referred to in §7.10, 27A.1, 81.1, 103A.55, 123.46, 123.47, 135C.33, 232.8, 307.27, 312.1, 312.7, 321A.3, 321E.29, 321F.8, 321H.2, 321H.4A, 321I.1, 321I.31, 321J.4B, 321J.20, 321M.1, 321M.2, 321M.6, 322.2, 322.4, 322.9, 322.29, 322A.1, 322C.4, 322C.6, 326.5, 326.6, 326.11, 326.12, 326.22, 326.30, 331.362, 422.11N, 423.1, 423B.4, 435.26A, 462A.33, 516E.1, 535.2, 554.9311, 554.9503, 554.13104, 602.8106, 690.2, 692.1, 692A.101, 707.6A, 714.2, 725.1, 805.6, 805.8A(14)(i), 805.9, 805.16, 809.1, 809A.3, 811.9, 903.1, 910.1 Fines doubled for moving traffic violations occurring in road work zones; §805.8A, subsection 14, paragraph i GENERAL PROVISIONS 321.23A Affidavit of correction. 321.24 Issuance of registration and 321.1 Definitions of words and phrases. certificate of title. 321.1A Presumption of residency. 321.25 Application for registration and 321.2 Administration and enforcement. title — cards attached. 321.3 Powers and duties of director. 321.26 Multiple registration periods and 321.4 Rules. adjustments. 321.5 Duty to obey. 321.27 Implementation of twelve-month 321.6 Reciprocal enforcement — patrol registration period. Repealed beats. by 97 Acts, ch 108, §49. 321.7 Seal of department. 321.28 Failure to register.
    [Show full text]
  • Ultra Light-Weld 6-20414 Tamperproofing Adhesive
    INDUSTRIAL ADHESIVES 6-20414 Product Data Sheet Ultra Light-Weld 6-20414 Tamperproofing Adhesive Dymax Ultra Light-Weld ® structural adhesives can be cured with UV or Visible light. Ultra Light-Weld adhesives increase productivity, lower assembly costs and enhance worker safety. When cured with Dymax UV lamps, these adhesives provide optimum process flexibility. They allow the user to select the optimum combination of adhesive and cure mechanism to meet individual process and performance requirements. DESCRIPTION Ultra Light-Weld 6-20414 is an exceptionally fast and deep curing structural adhesive designed for tamperproofing set screws in electrical relays. 6-20414 has excellent adhesion to metal, glass, ceramic, thermoset plastics and phenolics. This product is in full compliance with RoHS directives 2015/863/EU. TYPICAL UNCURED PROPERTIES (not specifications) Solvent Content None - 100% reactive solids Composition Urethane Acrylate Appearance Amber Liquid Solubility Alcohols/Chlorinated Solvents/Ketones Toxicity Low Flash Point >95 °C (200 °F) Viscosity 13,000 cP ASTM D-1084 TYPICAL CURED PROPERTIES (not specifications) PHYSICAL Durometer Hardness D85 ASTM D-2240 Refractive Index 1.50 ASTM D-542 Dielectric Strength 500 V/mil ASTM D-1304 CURE DATA UV Light - Using 365 nm wavelength UV light [1] : Cure Time Intensity [2] Dymax (Seconds) mW/cm 2 Lamps Tack Free Cure 5 150 5000-EC Nominal Cure Depth (0.25 inch) 15 35 2000-EC © 2018 Dymax Corporation. All rights reserved. All trademarks in this guide, except where noted, are the property of, or used under license by Dymax Corporation, U.S.A. Technical data provided is of a general nature and is based on laboratory test conditions.
    [Show full text]
  • VW Golf & Jetta Service and Repair Manual
    VW Golf & Jetta Service and Repair Manual I M Coomber and Christopher Rogers Models covered (1081 - 344 - 1AA11) VW Golf & Jetta Mk 2 models with petrol engines, including fuel injection, catalytic converter, Formel E, 16-valve and special/limited edition models 1043 cc, 1272 cc, 1595 cc & 1781 cc Covers mechanical features of Van. Does not cover Convertible, Rallye, Caddy, diesel engine, 4 -wheel drive, Mk 1 models or new Golf range introduced in February 1992 Printed by J H Haynes & Co. Ltd, Sparkford, Nr Yeovil, Somerset ABCDE FGHIJ BA22 7JJ, England KLMNO PQRST © Haynes Publishing 1997 1 2 3 Haynes Publishing Sparkford Nr Yeovil A book in the Haynes Service and Repair Manual Series Somerset BA22 7JJ England All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or Haynes North America, Inc transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or 861 Lawrence Drive mechanical, including photocopying, recording or by any Newbury Park information storage or retrieval system, without permission in California 91320 USA writing from the copyright holder. Editions Haynes S.A. ISBN 1 85960 282 7 147/149, rue Saint Honoré, 75001 PARIS, France British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data Haynes Publishing Nordiska AB A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Fyrisborgsgatan 5, 754 50 Uppsala, Sverige Contents LIVING WITH YOUR VOLKSWAGEN GOLF OR JETTA Introduction Page 0•4 Safety First! Page 0•5 Roadside Repairs Introduction Page 0•6 If your car won’t start Page 0•6 Jump starting Page 0•7 Wheel changing Page
    [Show full text]
  • Identifying Software Theft Based on Classification of Multi-Attribute Features
    JOURNAL OF SOFTWARE, VOL. 9, NO. 6, JUNE 2014 1401 Identifying Software Theft Based on Classification of Multi-Attribute Features Ye Guo School of information, Xi'an University of finance and economics, China Email: [email protected] Mingyu Wang School of information, Xi'an University of finance and economics, China Email: [email protected] Yangxia Luo School of information, Xi'an University of finance and economics, China NWU (China) -Irdeto Network-Information Security Joint Laboratory (NISL), Xi’an, China Email: [email protected] Abstract―Due to the low performance caused by the into “embedded” watermarks and “constructed” traditional "embedded" watermark and the shortages about watermarks by whether or not it is changed from the low accuracy and weak anti-aggressive of single-attribute original program. The embedded watermarks are birthmark in checking obfuscated software theft, a software inevitable to affect program load and performance, such identification scheme is proposed which is based on as dynamic path-based software watermarking [6], classification of multi-dimensional features. After disassembly analysis and static analysis on protecting generating the watermark through encoding instruction software and its resisting semantics-preserving sequences or memory address in program; Threading transformations, the algorithm extracts features from many software watermarks [7], encoding watermark by thread dimensions, which combines the statistic and semantic competition, adding multithread to improve robustness features to reflect the behavior characteristic of the software, will lead to reducing efficiency of program execution due analyzing and detecting theft based on similarities of to the introduction of a large number of threads; Dynamic software instead of traditional ways depending on a trusted data structure watermark [8], [9]: the watermark third party or alone-similarity threshold.
    [Show full text]
  • Case Western Reserve Environmental Health and Safety New Globally
    “Safety Comes First ” Case Western Reserve Environmental Health Dec 2012 and Safety Jan 2013 Service Building, 1st Floor Phone: (216) 368-2906/2907 FAX: (216) 368-2236 In this issue: Website: case.edu/ehs Director’s 1 New Globally Harmonized System Corner GHS for many college students is the name of a popular brand of guitar strings. While changing strings can make your tired old guitar sound better so can changing tired old Safe Use regulations. of the 2 GHS stands for Globally Harmonized System. We are no longer isolated in the world and Chemical many products use components made in other countries that are then assembled in another Fume Hood country. Made in the USA or Made in China really can’t be said anymore. Thus a system had to be put into place to allow the easy conveyance of safety information that could cross over between different work cultures. Hence the GHS system was established as a universal Surveying standard for global transference of safety information worldwide. Radioac- Over the next three years you will see changes to the symbols used in the laboratories to 4 tive represent hazards as well as new symbols for hazard classes that did not exist previously in the OSHA Right To Know standard. Packages The time table for roll out is as follows: December 1, 2013 - Train all employees in the new labeling and SDS (Safety Data Sheets) Introduc- system. The SDS will be replacing the existing MSDS system with a new 16 tion to section format that all chemical manufacturers must use.
    [Show full text]
  • Known Attacks Against Smartcards
    Known Attacks Against Smartcards White Paper Discretix Technologies Ltd. Author: Hagai Bar-El Title: Information Security Analyst Email: [email protected] Tel: +972-9-8858810 www.discretix.com w w w . d i s c r e t i x . c o m Advanced security solutions for constrained environments ABOUT THIS DOCUMENT This document analyzes, from a technical point of view, currently known attacks against smart card implementations. The purpose of this analysis is to give the necessary background for the assessment of the mechanisms that can enhance the security of smart cards. This document is mainly intended for people who are considering the use of cryptographic modules and who need to compare several options with respect to their security. Known Attacks Against Smartcards Page 2 of 19 REFERENCES 1. A method for resynchronizing a random clock on smart cards, By Didier Moyart and Régis Bevan, Oberthur Card Systems 2. A Timing Attack on RC5, By Helena Handschuh and Howard M. Heys 3. An Overview of Smart Card Security, By Siu-cheung Charles Chan 4. Biham-Shamir Differential Fault Analysis of DES, By Eli Biham and Adi Shamir 5. Defending against DFA, By Sandy Harris 6. Design Principles for Tamper-Resistant Smartcard Processors, By Oliver Kommerling and Markus G. Kuhn 7. Differential Power Analysis, By Paul Kocher, Joshua Jaffe, and Benjamin Jun 8. DPA Q&A, By Paul Kocher, Joshua Jaffe, and Benjamin Jun 9. Hacking EPROM based microcontrollers in general, Author unknown 10. Hardware Security of Advanced Smart Card ICs, By Koninklijke Philips Electronics 11. Improving Smartcard Security Using Self-timed Circuit Technology, By Simon Moore, Ross Anderson, and Markus Kuhn 12.
    [Show full text]
  • Counterfeiting in the Wines and Spirits Market
    COUNTERFEITING IN THE WINES AND SPIRITS MARKET KEY ISSUES AND PRESENTATION OF ANTI-COUNTERFEITING TECHNOLOGIES Author: Eric Przyswa All rights reserved Eric Przyswa, consultant and Associate Researcher at Mines ParisTech at the Centre for Research on Risks and Crises, is the author of this report. He conducts research in the area of huMan security in industrial environMents and is particularly interested in public health issues and the risks associated with new technologies. He also acts as a consultant in this field to institutions and businesses. The author writes in Many leading acadeMic reviews in France and abroad, including HerMès, Futuribles, Tribune de la santé, InforMation and Society, etc.). SELINKO – May 2014 All rights reserved 2 COUNTERFEITING IN THE WINES AND SPIRITS MARKET KEY ISSUES AND PRESENTATION OF ANTI-COUNTERFEITING TECHNOLOGIES Author: Eric Przyswa All rights reserved 3 Table of Contents Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 6 I. General environment and counterfeiting on the wines and spirits market. ........... 7 I.1. Alcohol counterfeiting market ...................................................................................................... 7 I.1.a. Context ................................................................................................................................................................ 7 I.1.b. A sensitive definition ...................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluating Security of Executable Steganography for Digital Software Watermarking
    Evaluating Security of Executable Steganography for Digital Software Watermarking J. Alex Mullins J. Todd McDonald School of Computing School of Computing University of South Alabama University of South Alabama Mobile, AL Mobile, AL [email protected] [email protected] William R. Mahoney Todd R. Andel School of Computing School of Computing University of Nebraska at Omaha University of South Alabama Omaha, NE Mobile, AL [email protected] [email protected] ABSTRACT our country.” [4] The total estimated global monetary damages due Man-at-the-end (MATE) attacks against software programs are to software piracy in 2015 amounted to $52.2 billion with a “low- difficult to protect. Adversaries have complete access to the binary end estimate for the cost to U.S. firms is $18 billion” [4]. program and can run it under both static and dynamic analysis to Not only is software piracy causing monetary damages, but it is also find and break any software protection mechanisms put in place. a vector to spread malware to those people using pirated software. Even though full-proof protection is not possible practically or The BSA Software Alliance states that “it is increasingly clear that theoretically, the goal of software protection should be to make it these malware infections are tightly linked to the using unlicensed more difficult for an adversary to find program secrets by software – the higher the rate of unlicensed software use, the higher increasing either their monetary cost or time. Protection the likelihood of debilitating malware infection.” [5] There is a 29% mechanisms must be easy to integrate into the software chance of being infected with a piece of malware when a person development lifecycle, or else they are of little to no use.
    [Show full text]
  • A Taxonomy of Software Integrity Protection Techniques
    A Taxonomy of Software Integrity Protection Techniques Mohsen Ahmadvand1, Alexander Pretschner2, and Florian Kelbert3 1,2Technical University of Munich 3Imperial College London Keywords— Tamper proofing, Integrity Protection, Taxonomy, Software Protection, Soft- ware Monetization Abstract Tampering with software by Man-At-The-End (MATE) attackers is an attack that can lead to security circumvention, privacy violation, reputation damage and revenue loss. In this model, adversaries are end users who have full control over software as well as its execu- tion environment. This full control enables them to tamper with programs to their benefit and to the detriment of software vendors or other end-users. Software integrity protection research seeks for means to mitigate those attacks. Since the seminal work of Aucsmith, a great deal of research effort has been devoted to fight MATE attacks, and many protec- tion schemes were designed by both academia and industry. Advances in trusted hardware, such as TPM and Intel SGX, have also enabled researchers to utilize such technologies for additional protection. Despite the introduction of various protection schemes, there is no comprehensive comparison study that points out advantages and disadvantages of different schemes. Constraints of different schemes and their applicability in various industrial set- tings have not been studied. More importantly, except for some partial classifications, to the best of our knowledge, there is no taxonomy of integrity protection techniques. These limita- tions have left practitioners in doubt about effectiveness and applicability of such schemes to their infrastructure. In this work, we propose a taxonomy that captures protection processes by encompassing system, defense and attack perspectives.
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Railroad Administration, DOT § 268.21
    Federal Railroad Administration, DOT § 268.21 (2) The extent and proportion to will down-select one or more projects which the private sector contributes fi- to complete additional environmental nancially to the project. studies, investment grade revenue fore- NOTE TO § 268.17: FRA recognizes that appli- casts, and other studies and analyses cants for preconstruction planning assist- necessary prior to initiation of con- ance may not have detailed information with struction. Final design and engineering respect to each of these criteria, and that work will also be initiated for the the purpose of the preconstruction planning down-selected project(s). To be down- assistance is to develop much of this infor- mation with respect to a particular Maglev selected a project must appear to meet project. The preconstruction planning appli- the project eligibility standards con- cation requirements of this part 268 are de- tained in § 268.11 (b), rate highly in the signed to elicit whatever information an ap- project selection criteria specified in plicant may have pertaining to these cri- § 268.17, be judged by FRA to have a teria. good chance of being constructed with § 268.19 Evaluation of applications for the Federal funds authorized for this preconstruction planning assist- program, and be successfully operated ance. by a public/private partnership. The FRA will evaluate the applica- (b) Only one project will be selected tions for their completeness and re- in Phase IV of the Maglev Deployment sponsiveness to the requirements listed Program and be eligible for any Fed- in § 268.15. In addition, applicants are eral construction funds that Congress advised that the Maglev Deployment chooses to make available.
    [Show full text]