Explore >> Select a destination
|
You are here 
|
yurisk.info | ||
| | | | |
blog.nuculabs.de
|
|
| | | | | I always wanted to play around with a binary analysis framework but most of the time I was turned off by how difficult it was to install and use it. Just recently I've thought to give angr a try and now I want to share my experience with you! I will present you a two scripts that solve two challenges, if you wish to dig deeper and learn Angr then you should visit it's official documentation. | |
| | | | |
idea.popcount.org
|
|
| | | | | ||
| | | | |
blog.jak-linux.org
|
|
| | | | | The following program, compiled with clang 1.1, runs 500 times faster than the gcc4.5-compiled code (in both cases with -O2): #include #define len 1000000000L unsigned long f(unsigned long a, unsigned long b) __attribute__((noinline)); int main() { printf("%lu\n", f(0, 2*len)); return 0; } unsigned long f(unsigned long a, unsigned long b) { unsigned long sum = 0; for (; a < b; a++) sum += a; return sum; } Now, I would be interested to see what's happening here. I took a look at the assembler code both compilers create, but the only thing I found out so far is that gcc's assembly is easier to understand - 50 lines (gcc) vs 134 lines (clang). If someone knows the answer, please tell me. | |
| | | | |
yifan.lu
|
|
| | | For the past couple of months, I have been trying to extract the hardware keys from the PlayStation Vita. I wrote a paper describing the whole process with all the technical details, but I thought I would also write a more casual blog post about it as well. Consider this a companion piece to the paper where I will expand more on the process and the dead ends than just present the results. In place of technical accuracy, I will attempt to provide more intuitive explanations and give background information... | ||
