![]() |
![]() |
|
August 24, 2005Defeating Windows XP SP2 Heap protectionThere are a couple of interesting articles out that discuss how you can bypass the security measures Microsoft has added for heap overflow protection in XP SP2. The first article, written by Alexander Anisimov, shows how you can not only write to arbitrary memory regions and cause code execution, you can bypass the DEP (Data Execution Protection) that was added in SP2. The second article, written by Nicolas Falliere, shows how you can use critical section related linking structures stored on the process's default heap to produce a n*4-byte overwrite and bypass Windows heap protections. Interesting stuff. It looks like Nicolas has fed from Alexander's research to make a more predictable heap overflow that doesn't require the heap to have an active and unlocked lookaside table for the operation to succeed. His method introduced does not use the overwriting of heap-management structures at all to produce a four-byte overwrite. Instead he uses a process's critical section and waits for the predictable destruction of it to then overwrite the heap. This works because no sanity checks are performed on these particular backward and forward pointers. I would never have thought about this vector. Apparently, neither did Microsoft. Pretty interesting approach. Happy reading! Posted by SilverStr at August 24, 2005 07:22 AM | TrackBack |
![]() ![]()
My 5 Favorite Books
Writing Secure Code
Secure Programming Cookbook Security Engineering Secure Coding Principles & Practice Inside the Security Mind ![]()
My 5 Favorite Papers
Smashing the Stack
Penetration Studies Covert Channel Analysis of Trusted Systems DoD Trusted Computer System Evaluation Criteria NSA Security Recommendation Guides ![]()
Archives
March 2010
October 2009 August 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 April 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 April 2003 March 2003 February 2003 January 2003 December 2002 November 2002 October 2002 September 2002 August 2002 July 2002 ![]() |
|