US looking for revolutionary binary code system
networkworld.com
networkworld.com
A system to analyze legacy binary applications and "slice" out the functional components allowing them to be encapsulated and run separately as part of new more secure systems. It is assumed that the source code for the legacy system was lost long ago.
Specifically Darpa is looking for :
- Automatically analyzing and identifying binary executable functional components.
- Automatically slicing and extracting identified binary functional components into reusable programming modules, including defined inputs and outputs.
eg. performing a "projection" of the program. removing all instructions not related to calculating the inputs to the functional component. This is also sometimes called dependence analysis or taint analysis and has ~30-40 years of research. see: Frank Tip, “A survey of program slicing techniques,” Journal of programming languages, vol. 3, 1995, p. 121–189.
- Combining static and dynamic binary analysis to increase understanding and function of binary executables.
- Exploring formal verification methods to prove functional component properties.
- Developing intermediate representation language to support program slicing.
- Developing core technology to enable exploration and research for the BET program.
yes, the article title is bad.
As an alternative, DARPA could prescribe that all the executables they commission come with embedded source.
I'm sure a lot of source does get saved. Nevertheless, if your task were to secure legacy government systems as quickly and strongly as possible, you're going to pray for a breakthrough like this. It's not practical to walk up to a PC and, even with full authorization, dig up all the source code to the software that's running on it.
Even then, some things really are more noticeable by looking at the executable and often this is the side the attacker will be looking at. If you don't have the same or better capabilities than your adversary to analyze this side of it, you're effectively blind to your backside.
Source code isn't enough.
I'd rather believe that than believe that the DoD has lost a significant portion of its code base for its critical applications.