Biblio

Differential privacy enables general statistical analysis of data with formal guarantees of privacy protection at the individual level. Tools that assist data analysts with utilizing differential privacy have frequently taken the form of programming languages and libraries. However, many existing programming languages designed for compositional verification of differential privacy impose significant burden on the programmer (in the form of complex type annotations). Supplementary library support for privacy analysis built on top of existing general-purpose languages has been more usable, but incapable of pervasive end-to-end enforcement of sensitivity analysis and privacy composition. We introduce DDuo, a dynamic analysis for enforcing differential privacy. DDuo is usable by non-experts: its analysis is automatic and it requires no additional type annotations. DDuo can be implemented as a library for existing programming languages; we present a reference implementation in Python which features moderate runtime overheads on realistic workloads. We include support for several data types, distance metrics and operations which are commonly used in modern machine learning programs. We also provide initial support for tracking the sensitivity of data transformations in popular Python libraries for data analysis. We formalize the novel core of the DDuo system and prove it sound for sensitivity analysis via a logical relation for metric preservation. We also illustrate DDuo's usability and flexibility through various case studies which implement state-of-the-art machine learning algorithms.

Control-Flow Hijacking attacks are the dominant attack vector against C/C++ programs. Control-Flow Integrity (CFI) solutions mitigate these attacks on the forward edge, i.e., indirect calls through function pointers and virtual calls. Protecting the backward edge is left to stack canaries, which are easily bypassed through information leaks. Shadow Stacks are a fully precise mechanism for protecting backwards edges, and should be deployed with CFI mitigations. We present a comprehensive analysis of all possible shadow stack mechanisms along three axes: performance, compatibility, and security. For performance comparisons we use SPEC CPU2006, while security and compatibility are qualitatively analyzed. Based on our study, we renew calls for a shadow stack design that leverages a dedicated register, resulting in low performance overhead, and minimal memory overhead, but sacrifices compatibility. We present case studies of our implementation of such a design, Shadesmar, on Phoronix and Apache to demonstrate the feasibility of dedicating a general purpose register to a security monitor on modern architectures, and Shadesmar's deployability. Our comprehensive analysis, including detailed case studies for our novel design, allows compiler designers and practitioners to select the correct shadow stack design for different usage scenarios. Shadow stacks belong to the class of defense mechanisms that require metadata about the program's state to enforce their defense policies. Protecting this metadata for deployed mitigations requires in-process isolation of a segment of the virtual address space. Prior work on defenses in this class has relied on information hiding to protect metadata. We show that stronger guarantees are possible by repurposing two new Intel x86 extensions for memory protection (MPX), and page table control (MPK). Building on our isolation efforts with MPX and MPK, we present the design requirements for a dedicated hardware mechanism to support intra-process memory isolation, and discuss how such a mechanism can empower the next wave of highly precise software security mitigations that rely on partially isolated information in a process.