Researcher profile

Georgios Portokalidis

Georgios Portokalidis contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 13 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
2works
0followers
1topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

2 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

Building Embedded Systems Like It's 1996

Embedded devices are ubiquitous. However, preliminary evidence shows that attack mitigations protecting our desktops/servers/phones are missing in embedded devices, posing a significant threat to embedded security. To this end, this paper presents an in-depth study on the adoption of common attack mitigations on embedded devices. Precisely, it measures the presence of standard mitigations against memory corruptions in over 10k Linux-based firmware of deployed embedded devices. The study reveals that embedded devices largely omit both user-space and kernel-level attack mitigations. The adoption rates on embedded devices are multiple times lower than their desktop counterparts. An equally important observation is that the situation is not improving over time. Without changing the current practices, the attack mitigations will remain missing, which may become a bigger threat in the upcoming IoT era. Throughout follow-up analyses, we further inferred a set of factors possibly contributing to the absence of attack mitigations. The exemplary ones include massive reuse of non-protected software, lateness in upgrading outdated kernels, and restrictions imposed by automated building tools. We envision these will turn into insights towards improving the adoption of attack mitigations on embedded devices in the future.

preprint2020arXiv

SoK: All You Ever Wanted to Know About x86/x64 Binary Disassembly But Were Afraid to Ask

Disassembly of binary code is hard, but necessary for improving the security of binary software. Over the past few decades, research in binary disassembly has produced many tools and frameworks, which have been made available to researchers and security professionals. These tools employ a variety of strategies that grant them different characteristics. The lack of systematization, however, impedes new research in the area and makes selecting the right tool hard, as we do not understand the strengths and weaknesses of existing tools. In this paper, we systematize binary disassembly through the study of nine popular, open-source tools. We couple the manual examination of their code bases with the most comprehensive experimental evaluation (thus far) using 3,788 binaries. Our study yields a comprehensive description and organization of strategies for disassembly, classifying them as either algorithm or else heuristic. Meanwhile, we measure and report the impact of individual algorithms on the results of each tool. We find that while principled algorithms are used by all tools, they still heavily rely on heuristics to increase code coverage. Depending on the heuristics used, different coverage-vs-correctness trade-offs come in play, leading to tools with different strengths and weaknesses. We envision that these findings will help users pick the right tool and assist researchers in improving binary disassembly.