News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Solving a Crackme using Z3: Theorem Prover by ahelwer on Monday May 18, 2015 @02:18PM (#9566009)
Here's a similar use of Z3 as a keygen:

http://www.slideshare.net/extremecoders/keygenning-using-the...

I've been using Z3 at work for checking firewall properties (will have a blog post up soon) and it's pretty close to magic!

Re:Solving a Crackme using Z3: Theorem Prover by xtacy on Monday May 18, 2015 @03:17PM (#9566308)
Interesting! Would love to hear more. What are the classes of firewall properties you can express in Z3?
Re:Solving a Crackme using Z3: Theorem Prover by ahelwer on Monday May 18, 2015 @03:39PM (#9566427)
Firewalls are sets of rules which culminate in a decision to accept or block a packet. The rules are easily expressed in predicate logic accepted by Z3. You can do all sorts of neat stuff then; check out https://github.com/Z3Prover/z3/wiki/Publications

Some general examples:

* Does firewall 1 accept a subset of the packets accepted by firewall 2?

* Does firewall 1 accept the same set of packets as firewall 2?

* Does this firewall accept some arbitrary set of packets? (useful for proving implementation of security rules)

* Do any of the firewall rules overlap?

* Do any of the firewall rules conflict?

Z3 will also provide examples or counter-examples to the above true/false questions. I like to think of Z3 as an Oracle. You give it a bunch of statements describing what you're looking for, and it magically spits out an answer.

Re:Solving a Crackme using Z3: Theorem Prover by xtacy on Monday May 18, 2015 @04:34PM (#9566720)
Thanks for the detailed explanation. It's interesting to note that firewall rules are well captured in the predicate logic.

Just curious: Have you encountered rules that cannot be cast into predicate logic framework in Z3?

Re:Solving a Crackme using Z3: Theorem Prover by ahelwer on Monday May 18, 2015 @04:47PM (#9566778)
I've not. Firewall rules are of the form {predicate} -> {decision}, where {decision} is block/allow and {predicate} defines a set of packets: something like a source address range, source port range, destination address range, destination port range, and protocol. When a packet comes in, the firewall finds all matching predicates (there can be multiple) and makes a block/allow decision. Since checking for packet-predicate matches is done with simple and/or/not formulas, I can't think of a rule which could not be expressed in Z3. Also, this is hardly taxing Z3: it supports reasoning with real numbers and nonlinear constraints.
Re:Solving a Crackme using Z3: Theorem Prover by xtacy on Monday May 18, 2015 @05:18PM (#9566920)
Thanks again. I didn't know Z3 could handle formulae with real numbers. I will take a closer look at it. :)

On the network firewall rules (at multi-tenant Azure, I presume), what were Z3's runtimes look like?

Re:Solving a Crackme using Z3: Theorem Prover by ahelwer on Monday May 18, 2015 @05:33PM (#9566989)
Z3 was able to check equivalence of firewalls with a few hundred rules in a fraction of a second on a standard workstation. I was extremely impressed, especially since the brute-force IPv4 packet search space is 2^112! There's some wizardry going on beneath the hood.