text: Despite numerous countermeasures proposed by practitioners and researchers, remote control-flow alteration of programs with memory-safety vulnerabilities continues to be a realistic threat. Guaranteeing that complex software is completely free of memory-safety vulnerabilities is extremely expensive. Probabilistic countermeasures that depend on random secret keys are interesting, because they are an inexpensive way to raise the bar for attackers who aim to exploit memory-safety vulnerabilities. Moreover, some countermeasures even support legacy systems. However, it is unclear how to quantify and compare the effectiveness of different probabilistic countermeasures or combinations of such countermeasures. In this paper we propose a methodology to rigorously derive security bounds for probabilistic countermeasures. We argue that by representing security notions in this setting as events in probabilistic games, similarly as done with cryptographic security definitions, concrete and asymptotic guarantees can be obtained against realistic attackers. These guarantees shed light on the effectiveness of single countermeasures and their composition and allow practitioners to more precisely gauge the risk of an attack.
  @cite_13: Address-space randomization is a technique used to fortify systems against buffer overflow attacks. The idea is to introduce artificial diversity by randomizing the memory location of certain system components. This mechanism is available for both Linux (via PaX ASLR) and OpenBSD. We study the effectiveness of address-space randomization and find that its utility on 32-bit architectures is limited by the number of bits available for address randomization. In particular, we demonstrate a derandomization attack that will convert any standard buffer-overflow exploit into an exploit that works against systems protected by address-space randomization. The resulting exploit is as effective as the original exploit, although it takes a little longer to compromise a target machine: on average 216 seconds to compromise Apache running on a Linux PaX ASLR system. The attack does not require running code on the stack. We also explore various ways of strengthening address-space randomization and point out weaknesses in each. Surprisingly, increasing the frequency of re-randomizations adds at most 1 bit of security. Furthermore, compile-time randomization appears to be more effective than runtime randomization. We conclude that, on 32-bit architectures, the only benefit of PaX-like address-space randomization is a small slowdown in worm propagation speed. The cost of randomization is extra complexity in system support.
summary: The question on the effectiveness of probabilistic countermeasures against memory-safety vulnerabilities has been a matter of discussion in the literature for the past decade. @cite_13 , discuss the effectiveness of Address Space-Layout Randomization. They noted that in 32 bits architectures, the entropy achieved by ASLR only slightly slows down attackers, while causing performance overheads. They also discuss the increase in security by re-randomization, but different from us, they do this informally and only for ASLR.