Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Assistant
AI Research Assistant
Well-researched responses based on relevant abstracts and paper content.
Custom Instructions Pro
Preferences or requirements that you'd like Emergent Mind to consider when generating responses.
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash 143 tok/s
Gemini 2.5 Pro 50 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 Medium 33 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 High 28 tok/s Pro
GPT-4o 117 tok/s Pro
Kimi K2 195 tok/s Pro
GPT OSS 120B 436 tok/s Pro
Claude Sonnet 4.5 37 tok/s Pro
2000 character limit reached

How Memory-Safe is IoT? Assessing the Impact of Memory-Protection Solutions for Securing Wireless Gateways (2411.01377v1)

Published 2 Nov 2024 in cs.CR

Abstract: The rapid development of the Internet of Things (IoT) has enabled novel user-centred applications, including many in safety-critical areas such as healthcare, smart environment security, and emergency response systems. The diversity in IoT manufacturers, standards, and devices creates a combinatorial explosion of such deployment scenarios, leading to increased security and safety threats due to the difficulty of managing such heterogeneity. In almost every IoT deployment, wireless gateways are crucial for interconnecting IoT devices and providing services, yet they are vulnerable to external threats and serve as key entry points for large-scale IoT attacks. Memory-based vulnerabilities are among the most serious threats in software, with no universal solution yet available. Legacy memory protection mechanisms, such as canaries, RELRO, NX, and Fortify, have enhanced memory safety but remain insufficient for comprehensive protection. Emerging technologies like ARM-MTE, CHERI, and Rust are based on more universal and robust Secure-by-Design (SbD) memory safety principles, yet each entails different trade-offs in hardware or code modifications. Given the challenges of balancing security levels with associated overheads in IoT systems, this paper explores the impact of memory safety on the IoT domain through an empirical large-scale analysis of memory-related vulnerabilities in modern wireless gateways. Our results show that memory vulnerabilities constitute the majority of IoT gateway threats, underscoring the necessity for SbD solutions, with the choice of memory-protection technology depending on specific use cases and associated overheads.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (33)
  1. Inc. Anchore. 2024. Syft: a CLI tool and library for generating a Software Bill of Materials (SBOM) from container images and filesystems. https://github.com/anchore/syft Accessed: 2024-08-27.
  2. Arm. 2019. Armv8.5-A Memory Tagging Extension White Paper. https://developer.arm.com/documentation/102925/latest/ Accessed: 2024-09-04.
  3. Joseph Biden. 2021. Executive Order on Improving the Nation’s Cybersecurity. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/2021/05/12/executive-order-on-improving-the-nations-cybersecurity/. Accessed: 2024-06-20.
  4. Mind The Plug! Laptop-User Recognition Through Power Consumption. In Proceedings of the 2nd ACM International Workshop on IoT Privacy, Trust, and Security (Xi’an, China) (IoTPTS ’16). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 37–44. https://doi.org/10.1145/2899007.2899009
  5. Is Anybody Home? Inferring Activity From Smart Home Network Traffic. In 2016 IEEE Security and Privacy Workshops (SPW). 245–251. https://doi.org/10.1109/SPW.2016.48
  6. CycloneDX. 2024. CycloneDX: The International Standard for Bill of Materials (ECMA-424). https://cyclonedx.org/. Accessed: 2024-08-28.
  7. DG CONNECT European Commission. 2023. Cyber Resilience Act. https://www.cisa.gov/sites/default/files/2023-09/EU%20Commission%20SBOM%20Work_508c.pdf Accessed: 2024-08-27.
  8. Safe by design: where are we now? Safety Science 45, 1 (2007), 305–327. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2006.08.007 Safety by Design.
  9. Generic Bill-of-Materials-and-Operations for High-Variety Production Management. Concurrent Engineering: Research and Applications - Concurrent Engineering: RA 8 (12 2000), 297–321. https://doi.org/10.1177/1063293X0000800404
  10. Michael Johnson and Patricia Wilson. 2023. Penetrating Shields: A Systematic Analysis of Memory Corruption Mitigations in the Spectre Era. arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.04119 (2023).
  11. RustBelt: securing the foundations of the Rust programming language. Proc. ACM Program. Lang. 2, POPL, Article 66 (dec 2017), 34 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3158154
  12. Ashwin Karale. 2021. The Challenges of IoT Addressing Security, Ethics, Privacy, and Laws. Internet of Things 15 (2021), 100420. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iot.2021.100420
  13. ReFirm Labs. 2024. Binwalk. https://github.com/ReFirmLabs/binwalk. Accessed: 2024-08-05.
  14. A comprehensive survey of vulnerability detection method towards Linux-based IoT devices. In Proceedings of the 2023 2nd International Conference on Networks, Communications and Information Technology (Qinghai, China) (CNCIT ’23). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 35–41. https://doi.org/10.1145/3605801.3605808
  15. Nicholas D. Matsakis and Felix S. Klock II. 2014. The Rust Language. ACM SIGAda Ada Letters 34, 3 (2014), 103–104. https://doi.org/10.1145/2663171.2663188
  16. Matt Miller. 2019. Trends, Challenge, and Shifts in Software Vulnerability Mitigation. https://github.com/Microsoft/MSRC-Security-Research/tree/master/presentations/2019_02_BlueHatIL Microsoft Security Response Center.
  17. MITRE. 2024. Common Weakness Enumeration (CWE). https://cwe.mitre.org/. Accessed: 2024-08-29.
  18. Microsoft Security Response Center (MSRC). 2020. Security Analysis of Memory Tagging. https://github.com/microsoft/MSRC-Security-Research/blob/daf8d2e203be1047d86ec8c3378c9c8ab2364c29/papers/2020/Security%20analysis%20of%20memory%20tagging.pdf Accessed: 2024-09-26.
  19. Nquiringminds. 2024. SBOM-GAP. https://github.com/nqminds/SBOM-GAP Accessed: 2024-08-27.
  20. Creating a Large-scale Memory Error IoT Botnet Using NS3DockerEmulator. In 2023 53rd Annual IEEE/IFIP International Conference on Dependable Systems and Networks (DSN). 470–479. https://doi.org/10.1109/DSN58367.2023.00051
  21. OpenAI. 2024. Hello GPT-4o. https://openai.com/index/hello-gpt-4o/ Accessed: 2024-08-27.
  22. AddressSanitizer: a fast address sanity checker. In Proceedings of the 2012 USENIX Conference on Annual Technical Conference (Boston, MA) (USENIX ATC’12). USENIX Association, USA, 28.
  23. Satyajit Sinha. 2024. State of IoT 2024: Number of connected IoT devices growing 13% to 18.8 billion globally. https://iot-analytics.com/number-connected-iot-devices/ Accessed: 2024-09-04.
  24. John Smith and Jane Doe. 2022. A Comprehensive Survey of Tagged Memory-Protection Techniques. Comput. Surveys 53, 4 (2022), 1–30. https://doi.org/10.1145/3533704
  25. Dorsaf Swessi and Hanen Idoudi. 2022. A Survey on Internet-of-Things Security: Threats and Emerging Countermeasures. Wirel. Pers. Commun. 124, 2 (may 2022), 1557–1592. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11277-021-09420-0
  26. Clang Team. 2012. MemorySanitizer: A Detector of Uninitialized Memory Reads. https://clang.llvm.org/docs/MemorySanitizer.html.
  27. National Telecommunications and Information Administration. 2021. Software Bill of Materials (SBOM). https://www.ntia.gov/page/software-bill-materials Accessed: 2024-08-27.
  28. The CHERI capability model: revisiting RISC in an age of risk. In Proceeding of the 41st Annual International Symposium on Computer Architecuture (Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA) (ISCA ’14). IEEE Press, 457–468.
  29. Your Firmware Has Arrived: A Study of Firmware Update Vulnerabilities. In 33rd USENIX Security Symposium (USENIX Security 24). USENIX Association, Philadelphia, PA, 5627–5644. https://www.usenix.org/conference/usenixsecurity24/presentation/wu-yuhao
  30. In-fat pointer: hardware-assisted tagged-pointer spatial memory safety defense with subobject granularity protection. In Proceedings of the 26th ACM International Conference on Architectural Support for Programming Languages and Operating Systems (Virtual, USA) (ASPLOS ’21). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 224–240. https://doi.org/10.1145/3445814.3446761
  31. Building Embedded Systems Like It’s 1996. arXiv:2203.06834 [cs.CR] https://arxiv.org/abs/2203.06834
  32. A large-scale empirical analysis of the vulnerabilities introduced by third-party components in IoT firmware. In Proceedings of the 31st ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis (Virtual, South Korea) (ISSTA 2022). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 442–454. https://doi.org/10.1145/3533767.3534366
  33. A Large-Scale Empirical Analysis of the Vulnerabilities Introduced by Third-Party Components in IoT Firmware. In Proceedings of the 31st ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis (Virtual, South Korea) (ISSTA 2022). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 442–454. https://doi.org/10.1145/3533767.3534366

Summary

  • The paper presents a comprehensive assessment of memory safety in wireless IoT gateways by analyzing over 6,300 firmware images.
  • It demonstrates that Secure-by-Design strategies can reduce critical vulnerabilities by 74%, significantly boosting overall system security.
  • The study compares deterministic and probabilistic memory-protection methods, offering actionable insights for deploying robust IoT security solutions.

Evaluating Memory Safety in IoT: Implications of Memory-Protection Strategies for Wireless Gateways

The paper "How Memory-Safe is IoT? Assessing the Impact of Memory-Protection Solutions for Securing Wireless Gateways" addresses the crucial aspect of security in the expansive and diverse Internet of Things (IoT) ecosystem. As IoT systems continue to proliferate, particularly in critical sectors such as healthcare and emergency systems, the security challenges arising from memory-based vulnerabilities in wireless gateways become increasingly significant.

Core Findings and Implications

The empirical paper presented in the paper involved a comprehensive vulnerability assessment of 6,335 firmware images from various wireless gateway vendors, followed by a deep dive analysis of 502 select firmware samples. The results indicated that memory-based vulnerabilities constitute a substantial portion of security threats in these systems. Particular vulnerabilities related to spatial and temporal memory issues, exemplified by CWE-125 (Out-of-Bounds Read) and CWE-416 (Use After Free), were dominant. This analysis reinforced the significance of incorporating Secure-by-Design (SbD) memory protection mechanisms in mitigating such vulnerabilities.

The results demonstrated that implementing SbD memory safety mechanisms could substantially reduce critical and high-risk vulnerabilities in wireless gateways. With such mechanisms in place, the paper concluded a 74% reduction in common vulnerabilities and exposures (CVEs), leading to a 3.8-fold improvement in overall security for the average gateway.

Memory-Protection Mechanisms: A Comparative Overview

The paper provides a detailed comparative discussion on various promising memory-protection technologies, categorizing them into deterministic and probabilistic approaches. Technologies like CHERI (Capability Hardware Enhanced RISC Instructions) and Rust, a memory-safe programming language, represent deterministic solutions that require substantial architectural and code-level changes but offer comprehensive coverage against known and emergent memory threats.

Conversely, ARM-MTE (Memory Tagging Extension) is positioned as a probabilistic approach that offers a more accessible integration path with significant yet not absolute security benefits. Its reliance on hardware-backed tagging introduces a degree of unpredictability in certain scenarios, potentially affecting its suitability for applications demanding the highest security assurances.

The paper advocates for mixed SbD strategies that synergize software-based memory safety tactics with probabilistic hardware support to create balanced solutions that cater to varying degrees of security requirements and operational constraints.

Theoretical and Practical Implications

The research provides both theoretical and practical insights into the role of memory protection in IoT security infrastructures. The discussions on balancing overhead and security illustrate practical considerations for deploying SbD solutions industry-wide, emphasizing their role in enhancing the resilience of IoT environments.

From a theoretical perspective, the paper underscores the importance of designing inherently secure systems that radically reduce vulnerabilities at their roots, as opposed to relying solely on post-deployment security mitigations. This approach also aligns with emerging global legislative pushes towards mandated security standards in IoT devices.

Future Directions

The continuous evolution of SbD strategies suggests a dynamic field with ripe opportunities for further research, particularly regarding cost optimization and integration simplicity. Further exploration into hybrid solutions that effectively balance deterministic and probabilistic techniques, specifically in legacy systems, will likely yield significant benefits.

While this paper illuminates the critical need for implementing comprehensive memory safety strategies within IoT systems, it also highlights the ongoing requirement for industry collaboration in standardizing these security practices globally.

In conclusion, as IoT systems increasingly underpin critical infrastructure operations, the role of robust memory protection in safeguarding these systems cannot be understated. Addressing memory-related vulnerabilities through well-crafted SbD strategies is paramount to ensuring the security and reliability of current and future IoT deployments.

File Document Download Save Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com PDF File Document Download Save Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Markdown
Dice Question Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Open Problems

We haven't generated a list of open problems mentioned in this paper yet.

Ai Sparkles Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Generate Now
Lightbulb Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Continue Learning

We haven't generated follow-up questions for this paper yet.

Ai Sparkles Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Generate Now
List To Do Tasks Checklist Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Collections

Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.

User Circle Single Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Sign Up
X Twitter Logo Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Tweets

This paper has been mentioned in 2 tweets and received 37 likes.

Upgrade to Pro to view all of the tweets about this paper:

Start a free 7-day Pro trial
Reddit Logo Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Reddit

  1. [2411.01377] How Memory-Safe is IoT? Assessing the Impact of Memory-Protection Solutions for Securing Wireless Gateways (3 points, 0 comments)