LOGIN   :::   RECOVER PASS   :::   GET ACCOUNT    
Browse
  • Projects
  • Code (CVS)
  • Forums
  • News
  • Articles
  • Polls
  •  
    OpenCores
  • FAQ
  • CVS HowTo
  • Mission
  • Media
  • Tools
  • Advertise
  • Mirrors
  • Logos
  • Contact us
  • Find Resources
  • Job Opportunity
  •  
    Tools
  • Search
      
  • Download Cores (CVSGet)
  •  
    More
  • Wishbone
  • Perlilog
  • EDA tools
  • OpenTech CD
  •  
    Navigation: All forums > Cores > Message List > Message Post

    Message

    Reply | Reply all
    Date Prev | Date Next | Thread Prev | Thread Next Date Index | Thread Index

    From: Nicolas Boulay<nico@s...>
    Date: Sun Mar 27 22:19:11 CEST 2005
    Subject: [oc] Hardware and OS integration and security
    Top
    Le dimanche 27 Mars 2005 21:32, claudevms@c... a écrit :
    > The papers I have read online about preventing code injection via
    > instruction set encryption have taken the initial step of encryption of the
    > image on load. This would leave a program image unencrypted on the
    > filesystem. I was proposing encryption of the OS and all applications so
    > they execute encrypted where the LUT in the hardware would decrypt the
    > instructions at the last possible moment and out of sight of users. The
    > papers I read also presented information about encrypting interpreted
    > languages (e.g. Perl) and found that encryption worked in this environment
    > too. This may extend to Java, etc...
    >
    > As for return to libc I felt that the forced decryption of any buffer
    > overflow would result in garbage and forces the application to terminate
    > without a return to libc.
    >

    This could only be if you also encrypt data not only code (string and/or
    pointer address).


    ReferenceAuthor
    [oc] Hardware and OS integration and securityClaudevms

     
    Copyright (c) 1999 OPENCORES.ORG. All rights reserved.