The DOI matches its Crossref record.
SoK: Eternal War in Memory
Open accessAbstract
Memory corruption bugs in software written in low-level languages like C or C++ are one of the oldest problems in computer security. The lack of safety in these languages allows attackers to alter the program's behavior or take full control over it by hijacking its control flow. This problem has existed for more than 30 years and a vast number of potential solutions have been proposed, yet memory corruption attacks continue to pose a serious threat. Real world exploits show that all currently deployed protections can be defeated. This paper sheds light on the primary reasons for this by describing attacks that succeed on today's systems. We systematize the current knowledge about various protection techniques by setting up a general model for memory corruption attacks. Using this model we show what policies can stop which attacks. The model identifies weaknesses of currently deployed techniques, as well as other proposed protections enforcing stricter policies. We analyze the reasons why protection mechanisms implementing stricter polices are not deployed. To achieve wide adoption, protection mechanisms must support a multitude of features and must satisfy a host of requirements. Especially important is performance, as experience shows that only solutions whose overhead is in reasonable bounds get deployed. A comparison of different enforceable policies helps designers of new protection mechanisms in finding the balance between effectiveness (security) and efficiency. We identify some open research problems, and provide suggestions on improving the adoption of newer techniques.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
C-FLAT: Control-Flow Attestation for Embedded Systems Software
Abera, T., Asokan, N., Davi, L., Ekberg, J.-E., Nyman, T., Paverd, A., Sadeghi, A.-R., & Tsudik, G. (2016) · Proceedings of the 2016 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security · doi:10.1145/2976749.2978358 · Cited by 258
(2021) · doi:10.1109/isca52012.2021.00032 · Cited by 33
Efficient CFI Enforcement for Embedded Systems Using ARM TrustZone-M
Yeo, G., Kim, Y., Song, S., & Kwon, D. (2022) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2022.3230791 · Cited by 7
ExploitGym: Can AI Agents Turn Security Vulnerabilities into Real Attacks?
Wang, Z., Schiller, N., Li, H., Narayana, S. S., Nasr, M., Carlini, N., Qi, X., Wallace, E., Bursztein, E., Invernizzi, L., et al. (2026) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2605.11086 · Cited by 3
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Szekeres, L., Payer, M., Wei, T., & Song, D.
- Venue
- 2013 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy
- Publisher
- IEEE
- Published
- 2013-05
- Pages
- 48-62
- ISSN
- 1081-6011 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2117798902
- Cited by
- 664
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 24.28
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: SoK: Eternal War in Memory. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/sp.2013.13
- The paper
- Szekeres, L., Payer, M., Wei, T., & Song, D. (2013). SoK: Eternal War in Memory. 2013 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy. https://doi.org/10.1109/sp.2013.13
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.