51–60 of 131 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've tried different ones, they all seem to do a great job.
Out of curiosity (as someone disappointingly new to prompt engineering), what’s an example prompt you used with some success?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
> Packers and obfuscators are not a "VM". It may look like a VM and act like a VM, in that it has opcodes that you can write to in another higher-level "language", but that is not a VM. It's in the same sandbox as the thing you're trying to obfuscate. Indignant, caustic comments that simply discard all presented evidence such as this is the primary reason why people with the relevant experience have reduced their con…
Is there also a VM in their iOS app? I thought a VM would be against Apple's policies?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
VM-based architectures are really common in the obfuscation space, which is why you have executable packers[1], JS packers[2] and bot management products[3][4] leveraging similar techniques. As for why the obfuscation is needed: bot management products suffer from a fundamental weakness in that ultimately, all of them simply collect static data from the environment, therefore it would make much more sense to make the…
[flagged]
But that's basically an emulator of a VM, isn't it? It's like rewriting the Flash AVM2 into JS... it's still running in JS whereas the original VM was C++. It could JIT compile stuff but only because it literally was reserving memory that could overflow, and (semi-technical take here) from that advantage, of being closer to the metal, flowed all of the flaws in AVM2 that precipitated most of Adobe's woes with Flash. A VM implant in a web page that uses a plugin like Java or Flash, to get around running browser-sandboxed code, which can take over physical memory, is far different from just emulating a VM in Javascript. I wouldn't call writing a ton of opcodes in JS, which resolved to JS functions, a "virtual machine", because it isn't reserving anything or doing anything that Javascript can't do. Someone correct me here if I'm wrong... this is just heavy-duty obfuscation.
Also, one major purpose of a VM is to improve performance over what's available in the browser. If you use that as a measurement, this clearly doesn't fit that goal.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Packers and obfuscators are not a "VM". It may look like a VM and act like a VM, in that it has opcodes that you can write to in another higher-level "language", but that is not a VM. It's in the same sandbox as the thing you're trying to obfuscate. Indignant, caustic comments that simply discard all presented evidence such as this is the primary reason why people with the relevant experience have reduced their con…
If you explain what you disagree with, maybe people would learn something. If you joint "their ranks", you've simply gone down the bit of the "social media + expertise" bell curve, where the more expertise you get on a particular topic, the less you want to engage about it in public. This is not unique to any one field or realm of knowledge.
I've used VM's for years to run Windows on top of macOS or Linux on top of Windows or macOS on top of macOS when I need an isolated testing environment. I also know that Java works via the "Javascript Virtual Machine" which I've always thought of as "Java code actually runs in its own lightweight operating system on top of the host OS, which makes it OS-agnostic". The JVM can't run on bare metal because it doesn't have hardware drivers, but presumably it could if you wrote those drivers.
But presumably the VM being discussed in TFA isn't that kind of VM, right? Bytedance didn't write an operating system in Javascript?
I've been seeing "VM" used in lots of contexts like this recently and it makes me think I must be missing something, but it's the sort of question I don't know how to Google. AIs have not been helpful either, plus I don't trust them.
...can I ask a really stupid question? What is a VM in this context? I've used VM's for years to run Windows on top of macOS or Linux on top of Windows or macOS on top of macOS when I need an isolated testing environment. I also know that Java works via the "Javascript Virtual Machine" which I've always thought of as "Java code actually runs in its own lightweight operating system on top of the host OS, which makes i…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is calling a massive embedded JS obfuscator a "VM" a bit of a stretch? Ultimately it's not translating anything to a lower-level language. Still, I had no idea. This is really taking JS obfuscation to the next level. One kind of wonders, what is the purpose of that level of obfuscation? The naive take is that obfuscation is usually to protect intellectual property... but this is client-side code that wouldn't give aw…
VM obfuscation is a common technique for malware developers. The VM term is applied because the obfuscator creates a custom instruction set and executes custom byte code. This is generated per build.