bugtraq - Re: Countering Trusting Trust through Diverse Double-Compiling

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <8c5c6e580512141441r6f4c0e04j939e53664838791c@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2005 17:41:33 -0500
From: Mike Lisanke <mikelisanke@...il.com>
To: "David A. Wheeler" <dwheeler@....org>
Cc: bugtraq@...urityfocus.com
Subject: Re: Countering Trusting Trust through Diverse Double-Compiling

David,

I haven't read the original attack description recently, but; I seam
to remember that the ability of the tampered compiler to inject
malicious code could be stateful. Either a timing attack, or a attack
after n-builds, so that malicious code is injected in an arbitrary,
pseudo-random, less detectable way. Also, that this code would be
injected based on compiler state conditions (like after keywords
indicated that the code may be network based). I haven't read your
paper, yet; but; I'd be interested know where you'd plan to discuss
scenarios where your counter attack would fail. Thank you.

Best regards,
--
Mike