Our system is currently under heavy load due to increased usage. We're actively working on upgrades to improve performance. Thank you for your patience.
2019 IEEE 32nd Computer Security Foundations Symposium (CSF) 2019
DOI: 10.1109/csf.2019.00023
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Information-Flow Preservation in Compiler Optimisations

Abstract: Correct compilers perform program transformations preserving input/output behaviours of programs. Though mandatory, correctness is not sufficient to prevent program optimisations from introducing information-flow leaks that would make the target program more vulnerable to side-channel attacks than the source program. To tackle this problem, we propose a notion of Information-Flow Preserving (IFP) program transformation which ensures that a target program is no more vulnerable to passive side-channel attacks th… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
4
3

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 29 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Implementing a constant-time policy, either by hand or through means of an automated method, does not guarantee that such a policy will remain valid on the binary level. This is because compilers typically apply several transformations onto the input code and some of them might destroy properties that are present in previous phases of the compilation [Barthe et al, 2018;Namjoshi, 2017, 2018;Besson et al, 2019]. In the context of information leak, [Barthe et al, 2018] proposed a general method for proving that a compiler optimization preserves the constant-time property of a program.…”
Section: Constant-time Preservationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Implementing a constant-time policy, either by hand or through means of an automated method, does not guarantee that such a policy will remain valid on the binary level. This is because compilers typically apply several transformations onto the input code and some of them might destroy properties that are present in previous phases of the compilation [Barthe et al, 2018;Namjoshi, 2017, 2018;Besson et al, 2019]. In the context of information leak, [Barthe et al, 2018] proposed a general method for proving that a compiler optimization preserves the constant-time property of a program.…”
Section: Constant-time Preservationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, the proof techniques used for showing both kinds of results are remarkably close. Besson et al [Besson et al 2019] present another approach, for specific compilation passes.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The problem of (non-)preservation of secret-erasure by compilers is well known [19,16,17,18,15]. To remedy it, a notion of information flow-preserving program transformation has been proposed [17] but this approach requires to compile programs using CompCert [124] and does not apply to already compiled binaries.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The problem of (non-)preservation of secret-erasure by compilers is well known [19,16,17,18,15]. To remedy it, a notion of information flow-preserving program transformation has been proposed [17] but this approach requires to compile programs using CompCert [124] and does not apply to already compiled binaries. Finally, preservation of erasure functions by compilers has been studied manually [18], and we further this line of work by proposing an extensible framework for automating the process.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%