Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Interesting link, just skimmed it and haven't had a chance to watch the video.

> Length fields automatically make the grammar context sensitive which is much harder to secure according to langsec.

Is this accurate given a finite length field? I can imagine a DFA that recognizes the language of a single byte length prefix followed by strings of 1 to 255 characters, just that the node that consumes the length field will have 255 branches to sub-DFAs that recognize 1, 2, ..., 255 character strings.



Yes, I should have said “unbounded length field”. But, with respect to the discussion, a 32 or 64-bit integer is only bounded in the academic sense.

Also, here is a video that works a bit better as an introduction to LANGSEC: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kEfedtQVOY (around 19:00 is especially entertaining)


That's the tricky bit with the formal language hierarchy: it collapses when you add restrictions to finite quantities. For example, a context-free language with productions limited to a finite recursion depth is a regular language.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: