The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Practical Control Flow Integrity and Randomization for Binary Executables
Open accessAbstract
Control Flow Integrity (CFI) provides a strong protection against modern control-flow hijacking attacks. However, performance and compatibility issues limit its adoption. We propose a new practical and realistic protection method called CCFIR (Compact Control Flow Integrity and Randomization), which addresses the main barriers to CFI adoption. CCFIR collects all legal targets of indirect control-transfer instructions, puts them into a dedicated "Springboard section" in a random order, and then limits indirect transfers to flow only to them. Using the Springboard section for targets, CCFIR can validate a target more simply and faster than traditional CFI, and provide support for on-site target-randomization as well as better compatibility. Based on these approaches, CCFIR can stop control-flow hijacking attacks including ROP and return-into-libc. Results show that ROP gadgets are all eliminated. We observe that with the wide deployment of ASLR, Windows/x86 PE executables contain enough information in relocation tables which CCFIR can use to find all legal instructions and jump targets reliably, without source code or symbol information. We evaluate our prototype implementation on common web browsers and the SPEC CPU2000 suite: CCFIR protects large applications such as GCC and Firefox completely automatically, and has low performance overhead of about 3.6%/8.6% (average/max) using SPECint2000. Experiments on real-world exploits also show that CCFIR-hardened versions of IE6, Firefox 3.6 and other applications are protected effectively.
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
The Cybersecurity Landscape in Industrial Control Systems
McLaughlin, S., Konstantinou, C., Wang, X., Davi, L., Sadeghi, A.-R., Maniatakos, M., & Karri, R. (2016) · Proceedings of the IEEE · doi:10.1109/jproc.2015.2512235 · Cited by 391
ROPecker: A Generic and Practical Approach For Defending Against ROP Attacks
Cheng, Y., Zhou, Z., Yu, M., Ding, X., & Deng, R. H. (2014) · Proceedings 2014 Network and Distributed System Security Symposium · doi:10.14722/ndss.2014.23156 · Cited by 279
No Need to Hide: Protecting Safe Regions on Commodity Hardware
Koning, K., Chen, X., Bos, H., Giuffrida, C., & Athanasopoulos, E. (2017) · Proceedings of the Twelfth European Conference on Computer Systems · doi:10.1145/3064176.3064217 · Cited by 116
Metadata
- Authors
- Zhang, C., Wei, T., Chen, Z., Duan, L., Szekeres, L., McCamant, S., Song, D., & Zou, W.
- Venue
- 2013 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy
- Publisher
- IEEE
- Published
- 2013-05
- Pages
- 559-573
- ISSN
- 1081-6011 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2138517425
- Cited by
- 482
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 37.08
- 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: Practical Control Flow Integrity and Randomization for Binary Executables. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/sp.2013.44
- The paper
- Zhang, C., Wei, T., Chen, Z., Duan, L., Szekeres, L., McCamant, S., Song, D., & Zou, W. (2013). Practical Control Flow Integrity and Randomization for Binary Executables. 2013 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy. https://doi.org/10.1109/sp.2013.44
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.