Skip to content

Practical and Lightweight Hardening for x86-64 COTS Binaries

Sep 2026 · IEEE Internet of Things Journal · Vol 13, pp. 42850-42864 · 0 citations · 53 references

Abstract

As edge computing nodes and platform-class devices such as industrial gateways become increasingly prevalent, the x86-64 architecture is widely used in these deployments, making memory-safety protection against vulnerabilities in x86-64 commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) binaries a critical security requirement. However, existing mitigation techniques often rely on source code availability or specific compiler/OS support; furthermore, the protection scope of a single mechanism is typically limited, frequently necessitating the combined deployment of multiple defenses. Such superposition of multiple mechanisms tends to introduce significant runtime overhead and compatibility risks, thereby limiting their practical application in resource-constrained scenarios. To address this, we propose FEATHER, a lightweight, multidimensional memory-space hardening framework for x86-64 COTS binaries, designed to effectively harden COTS binaries without requiring source code support. FEATHER employs a program-aware, cross-layer memory-layout hardening strategy that composes application-level binary rewriting with runtime-library-level glibc hardening, covering the target program’s stack, global offset table (GOT), heap, code segments, and glibc. By jointly reinforcing both the application and its dependencies, it significantly reduces the predictability of the runtime memory space. We systematically evaluate FEATHER in terms of security, file size expansion, and performance overhead using Nginx, Redis, SQLite, and 20 representative Coreutils/Binutils programs, while constructing three representative application scenarios to analyze its applicability under different workloads and attack models. The experimental results show that FEATHER reduces the reliability of the evaluated exploitation paths while incurring modest overhead for most tested workloads. Its performance overhead is comparable to that of commonly used secure-compilation options and secure heap allocators.

View source

Similar papers

#computer vision Review Sep 2017

Agile Software Development Methods: Review and Analysis

This publication proposes a definition and a classification of agile software development approaches and analyses ten software development methods that can be characterized as being "agile" against the defined criterion.

P. Abrahamsson, O. Salo, Jussi Ronkainen et al. · 727 citations · ⚡54
#computer vision Jun 2008

The impact of agile practices on communication in software development

The study shows that agile practices improve both informal and formal communication, but indicates that, in larger development situations involving multiple external stakeholders, a mismatch of adequate communication mechanisms can sometimes even hinder the communication.

M. Pikkarainen, Jukka Haikara, O. Salo et al. · 401 citations · ⚡48
#machine learning Review Open access Oct 2014

Software development in startup companies: A systematic mapping study

The results indicate that software engineering work practices are chosen opportunistically, adapted and configured to provide value under the constrains imposed by the startup context.

Nicolò Paternoster, Carmine Giardino, M. Unterkalmsteiner et al. · 394 citations · ⚡54

Related blog posts

Microsoft Research Blog Oct 6, 2026

What AI gets wrong and what failure teaches us

Jennifer Neville did not want to go into computer science—but that’s exactly where she landed. Neville discusses the starts and stops that led to her professional sweet spot and her work identifying “surprising failures” making it hard for AI to handle complexity.  The post What AI gets wrong and what failure teaches us appeared first on Microsoft Research.

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.