<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>SSDT on Insinuator.net - Bold Statements</title>
    <link>https://insinuator.net/tags/ssdt/</link>
    <description>Recent content in SSDT on Insinuator.net - Bold Statements</description>
    <generator>Hugo</generator>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 13 Dec 2015 00:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
    <atom:link href="https://insinuator.net/tags/ssdt/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <item>
      <title>Investigating Memory Analysis Tools – SSDT Hooking via Pointer Replacement</title>
      <link>https://insinuator.net/2015/12/investigating-memory-analysis-tools-ssdt-hooking-via-pointer-replacement/</link>
      <pubDate>Sun, 13 Dec 2015 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://insinuator.net/2015/12/investigating-memory-analysis-tools-ssdt-hooking-via-pointer-replacement/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;In this blogpost we will briefly explain a well known Syscall hooking technique (a more detailed explanation can be gathered from e.g.  http://resources.infosecinstitute.com/hooking-system-service-dispatch-table-ssdt/) used by multiple malware samples (like the laqma trojan) and right after discuss how some memory analysis tools have trouble in the analysis and/or reporting of these.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Before we go further, I just shortly wanted to say, that this post is not intended to be a bashing of any tool. We have the greatest respect for all the effort and work which has been and most probably will be done in the future.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
