Share your story
The central voice for Linux and Open Source security news
Home News Topics Advisories HOWTOs Features Newsletters About Register

Sign up!
EnGarde Community
What is the most important Linux security technology?
Linux Events
Linux User Groups
Link to Us
Security Center
Book Reviews
Security Dictionary
Security Tips
White Papers
Featured Blogs
All About Linux
DanWalsh LiveJournal
Latest Newsletters
Linux Advisory Watch: March 27th, 2015
Linux Security Week: March 23rd, 2015
LinuxSecurity Newsletters
Choose Lists:
About our Newsletters
RSS Feeds
Get the LinuxSecurity news you want faster with RSS
Powered By

Defending against unsafe coding practices with "libsafe" Print E-mail
User Rating:      How can I rate this item?
Source: SearchOpenSource - Posted by Pax Dickinson   
Security In a previous tip about securing Linux applications with compiler extensions, we described a defense-in-depth layered methodology ("defense in depth") to proactively mitigate the potential for risk or damage arising from fatally-flawed programming constructs.

In this article, a second layer is introduced to add much-needed boundaries to checking to compiled C binaries, so as to produce robust, reliable applications capable of withstanding punishment from would-be attackers who try to break them.

The problem with compiler extensions is that they require a manual recompile of the code for the compiler itself, followed by recompilation of system binaries, to be truly effective. This painstaking and tedious process does not lend itself well to rapid deployment and thus, leaves much to be desired.

Enter libsafe, an all-purpose application defense mechanism that intercepts known-vulnerable library calls for pre-compiled binaries. By coercing any given vulnerable function call into a segregated stack frame, libsafe ensures that any potential for damage caused by errant code is safely contained within well-defined defenses. By providing a run-time protection mechanism, libsafe can do things that a fortified compiler suite cannot -- especially when it comes to setting upper bounds on the sizes for dynamically allocated buffers (or those buffers whose size isn't known at the time of compilation).

Read this full article at SearchOpenSource

Only registered users can write comments.
Please login or register.

Powered by AkoComment!

< Prev   Next >


Latest Features
Peter Smith Releases Linux Network Security Online
Securing a Linux Web Server
Password guessing with Medusa 2.0
Password guessing as an attack vector
Squid and Digest Authentication
Squid and Basic Authentication
Demystifying the Chinese Hacking Industry: Earning 6 Million a Night
Free Online security course (LearnSIA) - A Call for Help
What You Need to Know About Linux Rootkits
Review: A Practical Guide to Fedora and Red Hat Enterprise Linux - Fifth Edition
Yesterday's Edition
Partner Sponsor

Community | HOWTOs | Blogs | Features | Book Reviews | Networking
 Security Projects |  Latest News |  Newsletters |  SELinux |  Privacy |  Home
 Hardening |   About Us |   Advertise |   Legal Notice |   RSS |   Guardian Digital
(c)Copyright 2015 Guardian Digital, Inc. All rights reserved.