.net-security

Assembly MOV Instruction

最后都变了- 提交于 2019-12-24 10:47:09
问题 Hi guys im working on a CTF challenge and don't quite understand this asm command: mov %edx,0x20(%esp,%eax,4) Im assuming its: move $edx into (0x20 + $esp + $eax + 4) However when I checked this with gdb it isn't correct. Anyone mind explaining how this instruction works? Thanks for your help! 回答1: AT&T syntax for x86 memory references goes like this: displacement(base,index,scale) giving the address of displacement+base+(index*scale). That is, destination memory address for your instuction

C# - .NET 4.0 - That Assembly does not allow partially trusted callers

我的梦境 提交于 2019-12-06 13:32:23
问题 When running from a network share, my application throws the following exception: That assembly does not allow partially trusted callers. My application references two DLL files: BitFactory.Logging.dll FileHelpers.dll I'm not sure which one it is having problems with. AllowPartiallyTrustedCallersAttribute : Read up on it, but I do not have the source for either of the DLL files, so I'm not able to add the attribute to those DLL files. CASPOL.EXE : added my network share using a few variations

C# - .NET 4.0 - That Assembly does not allow partially trusted callers

两盒软妹~` 提交于 2019-12-04 19:27:25
When running from a network share, my application throws the following exception: That assembly does not allow partially trusted callers. My application references two DLL files: BitFactory.Logging.dll FileHelpers.dll I'm not sure which one it is having problems with. AllowPartiallyTrustedCallersAttribute : Read up on it, but I do not have the source for either of the DLL files, so I'm not able to add the attribute to those DLL files. CASPOL.EXE : added my network share using a few variations, such as caspol -machine -addgroup 1. -url \\netserver\netshare\* LocalIntranet nothing seems to

Is the result of a RSA encryption guaranteed to be random

别来无恙 提交于 2019-12-04 05:22:38
问题 I use RSACryptoServiceProvider to encrypt some small blocks of data. For the solution I'm working on, it's important that if the same piece of source data is encrypted twice with the same public key, the result (the encrypted block of data) is not the same. I have checked this with an example and it worked like I hoped. My question is now, if this behaviour is by design and guaranteed or if I have to add some random part to the source data for guaranteeing that data blocks with the same data

SecurityAction.RequestMinimum is obsolete in .Net 4.0

不问归期 提交于 2019-12-03 16:07:12
问题 Recently, our .Net client libaray is upgrading to compile against Net 4.0. After change the target framework to 4.0, the application has some compilation error. In AssemblyInfo.cs : [assembly: SecurityPermission(SecurityAction.RequestMinimum, Execution = true)] Error 7 Warning as Error: 'System.Security.Permissions.SecurityAction.RequestMinimum' is obsolete: '"Assembly level declarative security is obsolete and is no longer enforced by the CLR by default. See http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/

SecurityAction.RequestMinimum is obsolete in .Net 4.0

旧街凉风 提交于 2019-12-03 05:26:56
Recently, our .Net client libaray is upgrading to compile against Net 4.0. After change the target framework to 4.0, the application has some compilation error. In AssemblyInfo.cs : [assembly: SecurityPermission(SecurityAction.RequestMinimum, Execution = true)] Error 7 Warning as Error: 'System.Security.Permissions.SecurityAction.RequestMinimum' is obsolete: '"Assembly level declarative security is obsolete and is no longer enforced by the CLR by default. See http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkID=155570 for more information."' ` In .Net 4.0, it shows that: SecurityAction.RequestMinimum as

Is the result of a RSA encryption guaranteed to be random

独自空忆成欢 提交于 2019-12-02 07:07:17
I use RSACryptoServiceProvider to encrypt some small blocks of data. For the solution I'm working on, it's important that if the same piece of source data is encrypted twice with the same public key, the result (the encrypted block of data) is not the same. I have checked this with an example and it worked like I hoped. My question is now, if this behaviour is by design and guaranteed or if I have to add some random part to the source data for guaranteeing that data blocks with the same data can not be matched anymore after encryption. Here is the example: byte[] data=new byte[]{1,7,8,3,4,5};