The bibliographic entry was discovered and compiled by a machine, and published without a person checking it against the publication. The publication itself is the authors' own work — this badge says nothing about it.
From OpenAlex, which stores abstracts as an
index of words and their positions: what is shown is rebuilt from that,
and reads fluently whether or not it is what the author wrote.
Abstract
Abstract Obfuscation is the art of making code hard to reverse engineer and understand. In this paper, we propose a formal model for specifying and understanding the strength of obfuscating transformations with respect to a given attack model. The idea is to consider the attacker as an abstract interpreter willing to extract information about the program’s semantics. In this scenario, we show that obfuscating code is making the analysis imprecise, namely making the corresponding abstract domain incomplete. It is known that completeness is a property of the abstract domain and the program to analyse. We introduce a framework for transforming abstract domains, i.e., analyses, towards incompleteness. The family of incomplete abstractions for a given program provides a characterisation of the potency of obfuscation employed in that program, i.e., its strength against the attack specified by those abstractions. We show this characterisation for known obfuscating transformations used to inhibit program slicing and automated disassembly.
@article{giacobazzi2017maximal,
title = {Maximal incompleteness as obfuscation potency},
author = {Roberto Giacobazzi and Isabella Mastroeni and Mila Dalla Preda},
year = {2017},
journal = {Formal Aspects of Computing},
publisher = {Springer Science+Business Media},
volume = {29},
number = {1},
pages = {3--31},
doi = {10.1007/s00165-016-0374-2},
}