You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
The sus binary is a nice playground to run some syscalls, even from a "script" file.
It would be nice to have a way to run syscalls that require a buffer address.
My current workaround would be to take some random heap or stack address or construct an mmap call which is tedious.
Since the CStrings already land on the heap, it would be nice to also get some way to create such a buffer with a given size and be able to refer to it in other syscalls.
One could think of defining a malloc(X) shortcut that constructs a heap array of bytes with the given size.
Since variables aren't parsed yet, it would be nice to have a way of saying x = mysyscall() and in this case x = malloc(123) and then use the variable x in a following syscall write(2,x,123).
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
The
sus
binary is a nice playground to run some syscalls, even from a "script" file.It would be nice to have a way to run syscalls that require a buffer address.
My current workaround would be to take some random heap or stack address or construct an mmap call which is tedious.
Since the CStrings already land on the heap, it would be nice to also get some way to create such a buffer with a given size and be able to refer to it in other syscalls.
One could think of defining a
malloc(X)
shortcut that constructs a heap array of bytes with the given size.Since variables aren't parsed yet, it would be nice to have a way of saying
x = mysyscall()
and in this casex = malloc(123)
and then use the variable x in a following syscallwrite(2,x,123)
.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: