[HN Gopher] Retrofitting spatial safety to lines of C++
___________________________________________________________________
Retrofitting spatial safety to lines of C++
Author : jandeboevrie
Score : 16 points
Date : 2024-11-15 20:25 UTC (2 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (security.googleblog.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (security.googleblog.com)
| Animats wrote:
| New buzzword for old thing alert.
| vintagedave wrote:
| I'll say.
|
| > Attackers regularly exploit spatial memory safety
| vulnerabilities, which occur when code accesses a memory
| allocation outside of its intended bounds
|
| Isn't that... 'out of bounds memory access'?
| SAI_Peregrinus wrote:
| Yes. It's as opposed to temporal memory safety
| vulnerabilities, like use-after-free or data races.
| moyix wrote:
| [This is more of a reply to a deleted reply to you, but I
| don't want my efforts to go to waste]
|
| Spatial memory safety is a reasonably common term in the
| security / PL field. You can see examples of it being used at
| least as far back as 2009: https://scholar.google.com/scholar
| ?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C33&q=spa...
|
| It's in contrast to temporal memory safety, which deals with
| object lifetimes (use after free, for example).
|
| Here Google is probably also referencing a 2022 post of
| theirs with a very similar title, dealing with temporal
| safety: https://security.googleblog.com/2022/05/retrofitting-
| tempora...
|
| The terms are also in Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wik
| i/Memory_safety#Classification_o...
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-11-15 23:00 UTC)