Control-flow integrity
By Martín Abadi, Mihai Budiu, Ú. Erlingsson, Jay Ligatti. Conference on Computer and Communications Security, 2005
639 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: Artificial Intelligence, Computer Networks and Communications, Signal Processing
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/6a8f65381a627a2db6c756a7185d9106f0acefec
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Artificial Intelligence
- Dawn Song
- R. Sekar
- Michael Pradel
- Michael W. Hicks
- Manuel Costa
- Mathias Payer
- Abhik Roychoudhury
- László Szekeres
In Computer Networks and Communications
- Dawn Song
- Michael Pradel
- Claire Le Goues
- Michael W. Hicks
- Manuel Costa
- R. Sekar
- Abhik Roychoudhury
- László Szekeres
In Signal Processing
- R. Sekar
- Dawn Song
- Abhik Roychoudhury
- Michael Pradel
- Claire Le Goues
- Manuel Costa
- Michael W. Hicks
- Mathias Payer
Citations in the corpus
- Code-pointer integrity (2014, methodology): “Comparison to control-flow integrity (CFI): The average overhead for compiler-enforced CFI is 21% for a subset of the SPEC CPU2000 benchmarks [1] and 56% for MCFI [39] (without stack pointer integrity).”
- Baggy Bounds Checking: An Efficient and Backwards-Compatible Defense against Out-of-Bounds Errors (2009, background): “Techniques such as control-flow integrity [20, 1] or taint tracking (e.”
- Automated detection of persistent kernel control-flow attacks (2007, methodology): “We believe one such property is control-flow integrity [1].”
- Automated program repair (2019, background): “For example, such repair techniques can enforce control flow integrity [30], prevent code injections [31], automatically insert sanitizers of untrusted input, or enforce automatically inferred safety properties [32].”