Results 1 
5 of
5
Most programs stop quickly or never halt
 Adv. Appl. Math
"... The aim of this paper is to provide a probabilistic, but nonquantum, analysis of the Halting Problem. Our approach is to have the probability space extend over both space and time and to consider the probability that a random Nbit program has halted by a random time. We postulate an a priori compu ..."
Abstract

Cited by 9 (3 self)
 Add to MetaCart
The aim of this paper is to provide a probabilistic, but nonquantum, analysis of the Halting Problem. Our approach is to have the probability space extend over both space and time and to consider the probability that a random Nbit program has halted by a random time. We postulate an a priori computable probability distribution on all possible runtimes and we prove that given an integer k> 0, we can effectively compute a time bound T such that the probability that an Nbit program will eventually halt given that it has not halted by T is smaller than 2 −k. We also show that the set of halting programs (which is computably enumerable, but not computable) can be written as a disjoint union of a computable set and a set of effectively vanishing probability. Finally, we show that “long ” runtimes are effectively rare. More formally, the set of times at which an Nbit program can stop after the time 2 N+constant has effectively zero density. 1
T.: Filterresistant code injection on ARM
 In: Proceedings of the 16th ACM conference on Computer and communications security, ACM
, 2009
"... Code injections attacks are one of the most powerful and important classes of attacks on software. In such attacks, the attacker sends malicious input to a software application, where it is stored in memory. The malicious input is chosen in such a way that its representation in memory is also a vali ..."
Abstract

Cited by 4 (2 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Code injections attacks are one of the most powerful and important classes of attacks on software. In such attacks, the attacker sends malicious input to a software application, where it is stored in memory. The malicious input is chosen in such a way that its representation in memory is also a valid representation of a machine code program that performs actions chosen by the attacker. The attacker then triggers a bug in the application to divert the control flow to this injected machine code. A typical action of the injected code is to launch a command interpreter shell, and hence the malicious input is often called shellcode. Attacks are usually performed against network facing applications, and such applications often perform validations or encodings on input. Hence, a typical hurdle for attackers, is that the shellcode has to pass one or more filtering methods before it is stored
Most programs stop quickly or never halt
, 2006
"... This article was published in an Elsevier journal. The attached copy is furnished to the author for noncommercial research and education use, including for instruction at the author’s institution, sharing with colleagues and providing to institution administration. Other uses, including reproductio ..."
Abstract
 Add to MetaCart
This article was published in an Elsevier journal. The attached copy is furnished to the author for noncommercial research and education use, including for instruction at the author’s institution, sharing with colleagues and providing to institution administration. Other uses, including reproduction and distribution, or selling or licensing copies, or posting to personal, institutional or third party websites are prohibited. In most cases authors are permitted to post their version of the article (e.g. in Word or Tex form) to their personal website or institutional repository. Authors requiring further information regarding Elsevier’s archiving and manuscript policies are encouraged to visit:
J Comput Virol DOI 10.1007/s1141601001460 ORIGINAL PAPER Filterresistant code injection on ARM
, 2010
"... Abstract Code injection attacks are one of the most powerful and important classes of attacks on software. In these attacks, the attacker sends malicious input to a software application, where it is stored in memory. The malicious input is chosen in such a way that its representation in memory is al ..."
Abstract
 Add to MetaCart
Abstract Code injection attacks are one of the most powerful and important classes of attacks on software. In these attacks, the attacker sends malicious input to a software application, where it is stored in memory. The malicious input is chosen in such a way that its representation in memory is also a valid representation of a machine code program that performs actions chosen by the attacker. The attacker then triggers a bug in the application to divert the control flow to this injected machine code. A typical action of the injected code is to launch a command interpreter shell, and hence the malicious input is often called shellcode. Attacks are usually performed against network facing applications, and such applications often perform validations or encodings on input. Hence, a typical hurdle for attackers, is that the shellcode has to pass one or more filtering methods before it is stored in the vulnerable application’s memory space. Clearly, for a code injection attack to succeed, the malicious input must survive such validations and transformations. Alphanumeric input (consisting only of letters and digits) is typically very
A Turing test for free will
, 2012
"... Before Alan Turing made his crucial contributions to the theory of computation, he studied the question of whether quantum mechanics could throw light on the nature of free will. This paper investigates the roles of quantum mechanics and computation in free will. Although quantum mechanics implies t ..."
Abstract
 Add to MetaCart
Before Alan Turing made his crucial contributions to the theory of computation, he studied the question of whether quantum mechanics could throw light on the nature of free will. This paper investigates the roles of quantum mechanics and computation in free will. Although quantum mechanics implies that events are intrinsically unpredictable, the ‘pure stochasticity’ of quantum mechanics adds randomness only to decisionmaking processes, not freedom. By contrast, the theory of computation implies that, even when our decisions arise from a completely deterministic decisionmaking process, the outcomes of that process can be intrinsically unpredictable, even to—especially to—ourselves. I argue that this intrinsic computational unpredictability of the decisionmaking process is what gives rise to our impression that we possess free will. Finally, I propose a ‘Turing test’ for free will: a decisionmaker who passes this test will tend to believe that he, she, or it possesses free will, whether the world is deterministic or not.