151–160 of 231 posts
Binary Ninja deserves a mention in these threads: https://binary.ninja I've used IDA, Ghidra, and Binary Ninja a lot over the years. At this point I much prefer Binary Ninja for the task of building up an understanding of large binaries with many thousands of types and functions. It also doesn't hurt that its UI/UX feel like something out of this century, and it's very easy to automate using Python scripts.
Also this. https://github.com/jart/blink
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I imagine PIE chunks that you can kludge into other programs to Frankenstein implementations? Kind of like how mad max cars are made of bits and pieces bolted together
Indeed, you can kludge anything together into working chimeras, as long as you can mend the ABIs together. I've done a case study where I've ported a Linux a.out program into a native Windows PE program without source code: https://boricj.net/atari-jaguar-sdk/2023/11/27/introduction.... Another case study was ripping the archive code from a PlayStation game and stuffing it into a Linux MIPS program to create an asset…
Everyone in the comments is like, "take a look at this AI tool for Ghirda" This is indicative of two things. 1. While I can't stand the guy, ya'll need to watch Peter Thiel's talk from 10-15 years ago at Stanford about not building the same thing everyone else is, a la, the obvious thing. 2. People are really attracted to using LLMs on deep thinking tasks, off shoring their thinking, to a "Think for me SaaS". This wo…
I'm using a tool on Parallels on Mac that says "cannot run in virtual machine". Could I remove that check using Ghidra?
There is also Hopper for ObjC/Swift, haven't tried it personally though https://www.hopperapp.com
Everyone in the comments is like, "take a look at this AI tool for Ghirda" This is indicative of two things. 1. While I can't stand the guy, ya'll need to watch Peter Thiel's talk from 10-15 years ago at Stanford about not building the same thing everyone else is, a la, the obvious thing. 2. People are really attracted to using LLMs on deep thinking tasks, off shoring their thinking, to a "Think for me SaaS". This wo…
A VC might want variety and advise people he will vote with his dollars for variety, because he's not funding the same thing as everyone else is. Being first and the winner requires a lot to line up, so it shouldn't be the only, default, or best setting. Pursuing this is optimizing. Also a message from 10-15 years ago might not reflect the same context as today.
In other words, what's good for Peter Theil might not be goid for you.
Taking the opportunity to ask: are there nice recommended resources for a beginner to start with reverse engineering (ideally using Ghidra)? Let's say for an experienced developer, but not so experienced in reverse engineering? I guess one issue I have is that I don't have good ideas of fun projects, and that's probably something I need to actually get the motivation to learn. I can find a "hello world", that's easy,…
One thing which really helped me (and I wholeheartedly recommend) is to write simple programs, run them through the compiler and then in the disassembler. It really helps build a correspondence between program structure and its object code.
Eventually, you can make it even more fun and challenging by stripping debug symbols and turning on compiler optimisations.
Happy reversing!
Everyone in the comments is like, "take a look at this AI tool for Ghirda" This is indicative of two things. 1. While I can't stand the guy, ya'll need to watch Peter Thiel's talk from 10-15 years ago at Stanford about not building the same thing everyone else is, a la, the obvious thing. 2. People are really attracted to using LLMs on deep thinking tasks, off shoring their thinking, to a "Think for me SaaS". This wo…
Do you have a background in reverse engineering?
Are you just trying to argue for the sake of arguing?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you have a background in reverse engineering?
You literally have a blog post called "AI can only solve boring problems" Are you just trying to argue for the sake of arguing?