31–40 of 425 posts
Annndddd, it's ugly as fuck. Well, I'm not going to install something made by the NSA on my machine but I'd be interested in feedback.
It's not as if IDA is a work of art. Arguably, this is a cleaner, more usable interface.
Does it work for non windows binaries?
I am going to sound pessimistic here, but isn't there a real danger of having this technology available to bad actors and is there any value to keeping such things confidential if it plays a role in national security? If someone was releasing malicious software to hijack the power grid as an example, wouldn't they be first able to use this to try to improve the robustness and invisibility of their attack ? Or is the…
Not at all,this helps analyze malware not create it. There is no security obtained by preventing reverse engineering of a binary. If anything this makes adversaries ability to hide their methodoligies harder,a strategic advantage for someone like the US government.
I mean the evolution of stealth tech in military has followed a similar path. As radar systems improve over decades, they keep on working on new ways to evade detection for aviation/missile tech.
I understand the high level point of good tools being more widely available to the white hat crowd, but I am trying to understand the argument that this is 100% better in all cases and there are no downsides.
Why this is important (for those uninitiated): - Ghidra is basically the first real competitor to IDA Pro, the extremely expensive and often pirated state-of-the-art software for reverse engineering. Nothing else has come close to IDA Pro. - Ghidra is open-source, IDA Pro is not. - Ghidra has a lot of really cool features that IDA Pro doesn't, such as decompiling binaries to pseudo-C code. - It's also collaborative,…
To be fair, IDA Pro has a decompiler plugin to do this.
Why this is important (for those uninitiated): - Ghidra is basically the first real competitor to IDA Pro, the extremely expensive and often pirated state-of-the-art software for reverse engineering. Nothing else has come close to IDA Pro. - Ghidra is open-source, IDA Pro is not. - Ghidra has a lot of really cool features that IDA Pro doesn't, such as decompiling binaries to pseudo-C code. - It's also collaborative,…
> Ghidra has a lot of really cool features that IDA Pro doesn't, such as decompiling binaries to pseudo-C code. To be fair, IDA Pro has a decompiler plugin to do this.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's a competitor to IDA's monopoly, basically. It might be better in certain aspects.
IDA has a bunch of competitors --- Hopper, Binja, and all the Capstone interfaces.
Why this is important (for those uninitiated): - Ghidra is basically the first real competitor to IDA Pro, the extremely expensive and often pirated state-of-the-art software for reverse engineering. Nothing else has come close to IDA Pro. - Ghidra is open-source, IDA Pro is not. - Ghidra has a lot of really cool features that IDA Pro doesn't, such as decompiling binaries to pseudo-C code. - It's also collaborative,…
> Ghidra has a lot of really cool features that IDA Pro doesn't, such as decompiling binaries to pseudo-C code. To be fair, IDA Pro has a decompiler plugin to do this.
Why this is important (for those uninitiated): - Ghidra is basically the first real competitor to IDA Pro, the extremely expensive and often pirated state-of-the-art software for reverse engineering. Nothing else has come close to IDA Pro. - Ghidra is open-source, IDA Pro is not. - Ghidra has a lot of really cool features that IDA Pro doesn't, such as decompiling binaries to pseudo-C code. - It's also collaborative,…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
IDA has a bunch of competitors --- Hopper, Binja, and all the Capstone interfaces.
Yup, well aware of them (I think Hopper uses Capstone, FWIW). I'm sure you agree that they're not quite at the level of IDA, though ;)