> -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf > Of Jamie C. Pole [...] > We should definitely switch back to relevant stuff now, though. > > Has anyone done serious research into the execution prevention > measures that Intel claims to include in newer Pentiums? [...] [DudeVanWinkle] > > all application protection > > vendors claiming they have "execution prevention" are lying
Not that anyone is likely to notice this among all the noise right now... I've done quite a lot of research into the area of execution protection and related technolgies to complicate / prevent code execution, which I like to think is 'serious'. You can find my whitepaper at: www.eeye.com/research/whitepapers "Generic Anti-Exploitation Technology for Windows This paper will perform an impartial examination of generic anti-exploitation technology for the Windows platform. Beginning with a brief tour of the most important historical anti-exploitation projects, we will then analyse recently introduced security features in Windows XP, Service Pack 2 and Windows 2003, Service Pack 1, and summarise the remaining areas of vulnerability. Finally, we will discuss the various general approaches taken by 3rd party technology and also examine some possible future developments." Sorry about the minor plug, but it does seem pretty relevant. Cheers, ben _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
