
doi: 10.1109/msp.2012.113
handle: 1854/LU-3224753
As described in many blog posts and the scientific literature, exploits for software vulnerabilities are often engineered on the basis of patches, which often involves the manual or automated identification of vulnerable code. The authors evaluate how this identification can be automated with the most frequently referenced diffing tools, demonstrating that for certain types of patches, these tools are indeed effective attacker tools. But they also demonstrate that by using binary code diversification, the effectiveness of the tools can be diminished severely, thus severely closing the attacker's window of opportunity.
Technology and Engineering
Technology and Engineering
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 17 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
