[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Mass bug filing: Cryptographic protection against modification



On Sun, 2004-05-09 at 15:04, Eike "zyro" Sauer wrote:
> Don Armstrong schrieb:
> > We face this same problem daily with programs, albeit in a slightly
> > different form. [Eg, machine code vs. assembly vs. higher languages.]
> 
> Could you give some examples where we've got assembly/machine code
> in a program you suspect to be just compiler output? 

I would say anything without semantically meaningful labels would be a
good initial heuristic (e.g. jmp 0xdeadbeef rather than jmp _my_func),
or something without any comments. This one is kind of tricky, because
it's difficult to find any assembly-only programs Debian wants to
distribute in the first place, let alone one that might be an attempt at
malicious licensing.

I'm sure people with a background in compilers and assemblers could come
up with much better checks than I did; likewise, people familiar with
graphical tools would be good at telling if something came from a vector
or raster editor.

I do appreciate having source for things like images, and I think it's
important that Debian require such things. I know I keep XCFs lying
around for non-trivial images I make.
-- 
Joe Wreschnig <piman@debian.org>

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part


Reply to: