Below my post about Chrome's sandbox I engaged in a discussion with AlienRancher regarding the function hooking (or 'interception' as Google calls it) really being a security mechanism. I must confess that I really thought it was, and I even liked the idea. But in fact it came out that function hooking is for compatibility purposes only. If a plugin has trouble running in a restricted environment due to problems with limited access to some keys/files, the hooking mechanism can transfer the calls to the browser, and they will be done with browser privileges (of course if a certain rule allows it).
It means that my hook taking off PoC was still OK, but not really needed for anything ;>
Sorry for misinterpreting the whole hooking mechanism then ;>
Links / Blogs
- → dragonsector.pl
- → vexillium.org
- Security/Hacking:
- Reverse Eng./Low-Level:
- Programming/Code:
Posts
- Security PWNing 2018: 10 grants from Google,
- Slides from my ZIP talk in Ingolstadt,
- ZIP file format talk at Technische Hochschule Ingolstadt,
- Livestream: 28.03 8PM CEST - Soundcard networking,
- PWNing 2018: Looking for sponsors,
- GWGC 2017/18: Results,
- Surprising CTF task solution using php://filter,
- GWGC 2017/18: Vote for Community Choice Award,
- Python 3 BrokenPipeError woes (debugging notes),
- Gynvael's Winter GameDev Challenge 2017,
- → see all posts on main page
Add a comment: