> On Aug 25, 2020, at 1:41 AM, Uros Bizjak <ubiz...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>
>>>>> (The other side of the coin is how much this helps prevent exploitation;
>>>>> numbers on that would be good to see, too.)
>>>>
>>>> This can be well showed from the paper:
>>>>
>>>> "Clean the Scratch Registers: A Way to Mitigate Return-Oriented
>>>> Programming Attacks"
>>>>
>>>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8445132__;!!GqivPVa7Brio!JbdLvo54xB3ORTeZqpy_PwZsL9drNLaKjbg14bTKMOwxt8LWnjZ8gJWlqtlrFKPh$
>>>>
>>>> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8445132__;!!GqivPVa7Brio!JbdLvo54xB3ORTeZqpy_PwZsL9drNLaKjbg14bTKMOwxt8LWnjZ8gJWlqtlrFKPh$
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>> Please take a look at this paper.
>>>
>>> As I told you before, that isn't open information, I cannot reply to
>>> any of that.
>>
>> A little confused here, what’s you mean by “open information”? Is the
>> information in a published paper not open information?
>
> No, because it is behind a paywall.
Still don’t understand here: this paper has been published in the proceeding
of “ 2018 IEEE 29th International Conference on Application-specific Systems,
Architectures and Processors (ASAP)”.
If you want to read the complete version online, you need to pay for it.
However, it’s still a published paper, and the information inside it should be
“open information”.
So, what’s the definition of “open information” you have?
I downloaded a PDF copy of this paper through my company’s paid account. But I
am not sure whether it’s legal for me to attach it to this mailing list?
Qing
>
> Uros.
