> After bit of thought a loops with callback can be optimized by gcc.
>
> It could be possible to teach CSE to rewrite
>
> while(foo){
> check(p);
> (*p)(x,y,z);
> }
>
> into
>
> check(p);
> while(foo){
> (*p)(x,y,z);
> }
>
This might introduce security issues, if an attacker is able to
o
On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 07:04:58PM +0200, Stephen Röttger wrote:
>
> > What is performance impact for program that just qsorts big array? It
> > looks like worst case scenario for me.
>
> I just put together a quick test program that sorts an array of 10^6
> integers and stopped the execution tim
> What is performance impact for program that just qsorts big array? It
> looks like worst case scenario for me.
I just put together a quick test program that sorts an array of 10^6
integers and stopped the execution time using "time". The results are as
follows (+- 0,01s):
protection disabled,
On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 04:43:13PM +0200, Stephen Röttger wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> I'd like to present you my master's thesis "Malicious Code Execution
> Prevention through Function Pointer Protection" [0] and its
> proof-of-concept implementation [1] for the gcc+glibc and would
> appreciate some
I'm terrible sorry, I've just seen the first couple of pages and I was
wrong...thanks.
The pdf is in english, just parts of the cover and the affirmation are
in german.
On 21.08.2013 17:28, Alessandro Cresto Miseroglio wrote:
> in English?
> (http://zero-entropy.de/fpp.pdf is in Deutsch)
>
in English?
(http://zero-entropy.de/fpp.pdf is in Deutsch)
