MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2971822346 · doi:10.1145/3355378.3355383

Efficient and Precise Dynamic Construction of Control Flow Graphs

2019· article· en· W2971822346 on OpenAlexaff
Andrei Rimsa, José Nelson Amaral, Fernando Magno Quintão

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Malware Detection Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceStatic analysisSymbolic executionControl flow analysisControl flowOverhead (engineering)Binary numberControl flow graphData structureTheoretical computer scienceProgramming languageType inferenceData flow diagramData-flow analysisInferenceSoftwareDatabaseReactive programmingProgramming paradigmMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The extraction of high-level information from binary code is an important problem in programming languages, whose solution supports the detection of malware in binary code and the construction of dynamic program slices. The Control Flow Graph is one of the instruments used to represent the structure of binary programs. Most solutions to reconstruct CFGs from binary programs rely on purely static techniques, based either on data-flow analyses, or in type inference. In contrast, in this work we use a purely dynamic approach to such a purpose. Our technique can be used alone, or in combination with static analysis tools. We demonstrate that it is possible to verify completeness in several real-world programs. We also show how to combine our technique with DynInst, the current state-of-the-art static CFG reconstructor. By providing DynInst with extra information, we improve its capacity to deal with indirect jumps. Our dynamic CFG reconstructor has been implemented on top of valgrind. When applied on cBench, this implementation is able to completely cover 36% of all the functions available in that suite. It adds an average overhead of 43x onto the execution of the original programs. Although expressive, this overhead is almost four times lower than the overhead of DCFG, a tool distributed by Intel, and built on top of PinPlay.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.934
Threshold uncertainty score0.229

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.002
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.200 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Malware Detection TechniquesFrench-language works237,207