Buffer overflow - Revision history

Jmanico: Redirected page to Buffer Overflows

2014-09-03T20:49:48Z

Redirected page to Buffer Overflows

KirstenS at 16:09, 11 April 2009

2009-04-11T16:09:15Z

KirstenS at 16:09, 11 April 2009

2009-04-11T16:09:02Z

KirstenS at 16:08, 11 April 2009

2009-04-11T16:08:46Z

KirstenS at 16:08, 11 April 2009

2009-04-11T16:08:32Z

KirstenS at 00:40, 21 September 2008

2008-09-21T00:40:12Z

KirstenS at 18:46, 6 September 2008

2008-09-06T18:46:01Z

KirstenS at 16:07, 3 September 2008

2008-09-03T16:07:19Z

Weilin Zhong at 19:20, 7 August 2006

2006-08-07T19:20:48Z

Weilin Zhong at 20:47, 4 August 2006

2006-08-04T20:47:27Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:49, 3 September 2014
Line 1:		Line 1:
−	~~{{template:CandidateForDeletion}}~~	+	#REDIRECT [[Buffer_Overflows]]
−
−	~~<<! marked for deletion because it's a duplicate>>~~
−	#REDIRECT [[~~Buffer Overflow~~]]
−	~~==Overview==~~
−
−	A buffer overflow condition exists when a program attempts to put more data in a buffer than it can hold or when a program attempts to put data in a memory area past a buffer. In this case, a buffer is a sequential section of memory allocated to contain anything from a character string to an array of integers.
−
−	~~==Consequences ==~~
−
−	* Category:Availability: Buffer overflows generally lead to crashes. Other attacks leading to lack of availability are possible, including putting the program into an infinite loop.
−
−	* Access control (instruction processing): Buffer overflows often can be used to execute arbitrary code, which is usually outside the scope of a program’s implicit security policy.
−
−	* Other: When the consequence is arbitrary code execution, this can often be used to subvert any other security service.
−
−	~~==Exposure period ==~~
−
−	* Requirements specification: The choice could be made to use a language that is not susceptible to these issues.
−
−	* Design: Mitigating technologies such as safe-string libraries and container abstractions could be introduced.
−
−	* Implementation: Many logic errors can lead to this condition. It can be exacerbated by lack of or mis¬use of mitigating technologies.
−
−	~~==Platform ==~~
−
−	* Languages: C, C++, Fortran, Assembly
−
−	* Operating platforms: All, although partial preventative measures may be deployed, depending on environment.
−
−	~~==Required resources ==~~
−
−	~~Any~~
−
−	~~==Severity ==~~
−
−	~~Very High~~
−
−	~~==Likelihood of exploit ==~~
−
−	~~High to Very High~~
−
−	~~==Avoidance and mitigation ==~~
−
−	* Pre-design: Use a language or compiler that performs automatic bounds checking.
−
−	* Design: Use an abstraction library to abstract away risky APIs. Not a complete solution.
−
−	* Pre-design through Build: Compiler-based canary mechanisms such as StackGuard, ProPolice and the Microsoft Visual Studio / GS flag. Unless this provides automatic bounds checking, it is not a complete solution.
−
−	* Operational: Use OS-level preventative functionality. Not a complete solution.
−
−	~~==Discussion ==~~
−
−	Buffer overflows are one of the best known types of security problem. The best solution is enforced run-time bounds checking of array access, but many C/C++ programmers assume this is too costly or do not have the technology available to them. Even this problem only addresses failures in access control — as an out-of-bounds access is still an exception condition and can lead to an availability problem if not addressed.
−
−	Some platforms are introducing mitigating technologies at the compiler or OS level. All such technologies to date address only a subset of buffer overflow problems and rarely provide complete protection against even that subset. It is more common to make the workload of an attacker much higher — for example, by leaving the attacker to guess an unknown value that changes every program execution.
−
−	~~==Examples ==~~
−
−	~~There are many real-world examples of buffer overflows, including many popular “industrial” applications, such as e-mail servers (Sendmail) and web servers (Microsoft IIS Server).~~
−
−	~~In code, here is a simple, if contrived example:~~
−
−	~~<pre>void example(char *s) {~~
−	~~char buf[1024];~~
−	~~strcpy(buf, s);~~
−	}
−	~~int main(int argc, char **argv) {~~
−	~~example(argv[1]);~~
−	~~}</pre>~~
−
−	~~Since argv[1] can be of any length, more than 1024 characters can be copied into the variable buf.~~
−
−	~~==Related problems ==~~
−
−	* [[Stack overflow]]
−
−	* [[Heap overflow]]
−
−	* [[Integer overflow]]
−
−	~~==How to test ==~~

@@ Line 2: / Line 2: @@
 <<! marked for deletion because it's a duplicate>>
-#REDIRECT [[Buffer Overflow]]
+ #REDIRECT [[Buffer Overflow]]
 ==Overview==

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 {{template:CandidateForDeletion}}
-<<marked for deletion because it's a duplicate>>
+<<! marked for deletion because it's a duplicate>>
 #REDIRECT [[Buffer Overflow]]
 ==Overview==

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 {{template:CandidateForDeletion}}
-<<!-marked for deletion because it's a duplicate>>
+<<marked for deletion because it's a duplicate>>
 #REDIRECT [[Buffer Overflow]]
 ==Overview==

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 {{template:CandidateForDeletion}}
-{{Template:SecureSoftware}}
+<<!-marked for deletion because it's a duplicate>>
 #REDIRECT [[Buffer Overflow]]
 ==Overview==

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:46, 6 September 2008
Line 84:		Line 84:

	==How to test ==		==How to test ==
−	~~[[Testing for buffer overflow]]~~
−
−	~~[[Category:Vulnerability]]~~
−	~~[[Category:Range and Type Error Vulnerability]]~~
−	~~[[Category:OWASP_CLASP_Project]]~~
−	~~[[Category:Code Snippet]]~~
−	~~[[Category:C]]~~

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:20, 7 August 2006
Line 86:		Line 86:
	[[Category:Range and Type Error Vulnerability]]		[[Category:Range and Type Error Vulnerability]]
	[[Category:OWASP_CLASP_Project]]		[[Category:OWASP_CLASP_Project]]
		+	[[Category:Code Snippet]]
		+	[[Category:C]]

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 {{Template:SecureSoftware}}
@@ Line 83: / Line 84: @@
 [[Category:Vulnerability]]
+[[Category:Range and Type Error Vulnerability]]
 [[Category:OWASP_CLASP_Project]]