[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20051202233928.GB21813@foofus.net>
Date: Fri Dec 2 23:36:38 2005
From: foofus at foofus.net (foofus@...fus.net)
Subject: Most common keystroke loggers?
On Sat, Dec 03, 2005 at 12:22:17PM +1300, Nick FitzGerald wrote:
> Ahh, no...
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halting_problem
>
> Basically (and simplifying a lot), the Halting Problem means that you
> cannot write a computer program to determine if some other program
> exhibits "function X", _in finite time_.
I don't think this is what the Halting Problem means. My understanding
is that it means you can't write a program to determine if *any* other
program exhibits "function X", in finite time. For a particular
program, however, this may be quite feasible.
> Thus, you cannot write a
> program to detect all viruses, you cannot write a program to detect key
> loggers, you cannot write a prorgram to detect all spyware, etc, etc.
How do you know that the problem of detecting all keystroke loggers is
equivalent to the Halting Program? Is there a proof somewhere that
keystroke loggers do not share some characteristic that makes them
detectable? <-- I am not being sarcastic; this is an earnest question.
My formal CS background is weak, but I don't think the problem of
programmatically detecting compromised machines of a given OS (not
the general case of "compromised machines of any sort) has been proven
to be undecidable in the strong way that the Halting Problem has. I may
be wrong, though, which is why I ask.
--Foofus.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists