Building Dynamic System Call Sandbox with Partial Order Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Attack surface reduction is a security technique that secures the operating system by removing the unnecessary code or features of a program. By restricting the system calls that programs can use, the system call sandbox is able to reduce the exposed attack surface of the operating system and prevent attackers from damaging it through vulnerable programs. Ideally, programs should only retain access to system calls they require for normal execution. Many researchers focus on adopting static analysis to automatically restrict the system calls for each program. However, these methods do not adjust the restriction policy along with program execution. Thus, they need to permit all system calls required for program functionalities. We observe that some system calls, especially security-sensitive ones, are used a few times in certain stages of a program’s execution and then never used again. This motivates us to minimize the set of required system calls dynamically. In this paper, we propose , which gradually disables access to unnecessary system calls throughout the program’s execution. To accomplish this, we utilize partial order analysis to transform the program into a partially ordered graph, which enables efficient identification of the necessary system calls at any given point during program execution. Once a system call is no longer required by the program, can restrict it immediately. To evaluate , we applied it to seven widely-used programs with an average of 615 KLOC, including web servers and databases. With partial order analysis, restricts an average of 23.50, 16.86, and 15.89 more system calls than the state-of-the-art Chestnut, Temporal Specialization, and the configuration-aware sandbox, C2C, respectively. For mitigating malicious exploitations, on average, defeats 83.42% of 1726 exploitation payloads with only a 5.07% overhead.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".