Polymorphic code: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 12:09, 30 August 2005

Latest revision as of 19:04, 7 April 2025

(174 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown)

Line 1:

{{Short description|Self-modifying program code designed to defeat anti-virus programs or reverse engineering}}

In computer terminology, '''polymorphic code''' is code that mutates while keeping the original [[algorithm]] intact.

{{distinguish|Polymorphism (computer science)}}

{{refimprove|date=November 2010}}

In computing, '''polymorphic code''' is code that uses a [[polymorphic engine]] to mutate while keeping the original [[algorithm]] intact - that is, the ''code'' changes itself every time it runs, but the ''function'' of the code (its [[semantics]]) stays the same. For example, the simple math expressions 3+1 and 6-2 both achieve the same result, yet run with different [[machine code]] in a [[Central processing unit|CPU]]. This technique is sometimes used by [[computer virus]]es, [[shellcode]]s and [[computer worm]]s to hide their presence.<ref name="rugha">{{cite thesis |last=Raghunathan |first=Srinivasan |date=2007 |title=Protecting anti-virus software under viral attacks |type=M.Sc. |publisher=Arizona State University |citeseerx=10.1.1.93.796}}</ref>

[[Encryption]] is the most common method to hide code. With encryption, the main body of the code (also called its [[Payload (computing)|payload]]) is encrypted and will appear meaningless. For the code to function as before, a decryption function is added to the code. When the code is ''executed'', this function reads the payload and decrypts it before executing it in turn.

Polymorphic code was invented in 1992 by the [[Bulgarians|Bulgarian]] [[security cracking|cracker]] [[Dark Avenger]] (a [[pseudonym]]) as a means of avoiding pattern recognition from antivirus-software.

Encryption alone is not polymorphism. To gain polymorphic behavior, the encryptor/decryptor pair is mutated with each copy of the code. This allows different versions of some code which all function the same.<ref name="wongstamp">{{cite journal |last1=Wong |first1=Wing |last2=Stamp |first2=M. |title=Hunting for Metamorphic Engines |journal=Journal in Computer Virology |volume=2 |issue= 3|pages=211–229 |date=2006 |doi=10.1007/s11416-006-0028-7 |citeseerx=10.1.1.108.3878|s2cid=8116065 }}</ref>

This technique is sometimes used by [[computer virus]]es, [[shellcode]]s and [[computer worm]]s to hide their presence.

Most [[anti-virus software]] and [[intrusion detection system]]s attempt to locate malicious code by searching through computer files and data packets sent over a [[computer network]]. If the security software finds patterns that correspond to known computer viruses or worms, it takes appropriate steps to neutralize the threat. [[Polymorphic]] algorithms make it difficult for such software to locate the offending code as it constantly mutates.

== Malicious code ==

[[Encryption]] is the most commonly used method of achieving polymorphism in code. However, not all of the code can be encrypted as it would be completely unusable. A small portion of it is left unencrypted and used to jumpstart the encrypted software. Anti-virus software targets this small unencrypted portion of code.

Most [[anti-virus software]] and [[intrusion detection system]]s (IDS) attempt to locate malicious code by searching through computer files and data packets sent over a [[computer network]]. If the security software finds patterns that correspond to known computer viruses or worms, it takes appropriate steps to neutralize the threat. [[Polymorphic]] algorithms make it difficult for such software to locaterecognize the offending code asbecause it constantly mutates.

Malicious [[programmer]]s have sought to protect their polymorphic code from this strategy by rewriting the unencrypted decryption engine each time the virus or worm is propagated. Sophisticated pattern analysis is used by anti-virus software to find underlying patterns within the different mutations of the decryption engine in hopes of reliably detecting such [[malware]].

Malicious [[programmer]]s have sought to protect their polymorphicencrypted code from this virus-scanning strategy by rewriting the unencrypted decryption engine (and the resulting encrypted payload) each time the virus or worm is propagated. SophisticatedAnti-virus patternsoftware analysisuses issophisticated usedpattern by anti-virus softwareanalysis to find underlying patterns within the different mutations of the decryption engine, in hopes of reliably detecting such [[malware]].

== Example ==

Emulation may be used to defeat polymorphic obfuscation by letting the malware demangle itself in a virtual environment before utilizing other methods, such as traditional signature scanning. Such a virtual environment is sometimes called a [[Sandbox (computer security)|sandbox]]. Polymorphism does not protect the virus against such emulation if the decrypted payload remains the same regardless of variation in the decryption algorithm. [[Metamorphic code]] techniques may be used to complicate detection further, as the virus may execute without ever having identifiable code blocks in memory that remains constant from infection to infection.

An algorithm that uses, for example, the variables A and B but not the variable C could stay intact even if you added lots of codes that changed the content in the variable C.

The first known polymorphic virus was written by Mark Washburn. The virus, called [[1260 (computer virus)|1260]], was written in 1990.<ref>{{Cite web |title=An Example Decryptor of 1260 |url=https://userpages.umbc.edu/~dgorin1/432/example_decryptor.htm |access-date=2025-03-21 |website=userpages.umbc.edu}}</ref> A better-known polymorphic virus was created in 1992 by the hacker [[Dark Avenger]] as a means of avoiding pattern recognition from antivirus software. A common and very virulent polymorphic virus is the file infecter [[Virut]].

The original algorithm:

Start:

GOTO Decryption_Code

Encrypted:

...

lots of encrypted code

...

Decryption_Code:

*A = Encrypted

Loop:

B = *A

B = B XOR CryptoKey

*A = B

A = A + 1

GOTO Loop IF NOT A = (Decryption_Code - Encrypted)

GOTO Encrypted

CryptoKey:

some_random_number

The same algorithm, but with lots of unnecessary C-altering codes:

Start:

GOTO Decryption_Code

Encrypted:

...

lots of encrypted code

...

Decryption_Code:

C = C + 1

*A = Encrypted

Loop:

B = *A

C = 3214 * A

B = B XOR CryptoKey

*A = B

C = 1

C = A + B

A = A + 1

GOTO Loop IF NOT A = (Decryption_Code - Encrypted)

C = C^2

GOTO Encrypted

CryptoKey:

some_random_number

The code inside "Encrypted" ("lots of encrypted code") could then search the code between Decryption_Code and CryptoKey and remove all the code that alters the variable C. Before the next time the encryption engine is used, it could input new unnecessary codes that alters C, or even exchange the code in the algorithm into new code that does the same thing.

== See also ==

* [[Metamorphic code]]

* [[Self-modifying code]]

* [[alphanumericAlphanumeric codeshellcode]]

* [[shellcodeShellcode]]

* [[softwareObfuscated crackingcode]]

* [[securityOligomorphic crackingcode]]

== References ==

<references/>

* Diomidis Spinellis. [http://www.spinellis.gr/pubs/jrnl/2002-ieeetit-npvirus/html/npvirus.html Reliable identification of bounded-length viruses is NP-complete]. ''IEEE Transactions on Information Theory'', 49(1):280–284, January 2003. [http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TIT.2002.806137 doi:10.1109/TIT.2002.806137]

{{refbegin}}

*{{cite Diomidisjournal |author-link= |last=Spinellis. [|first=Diomidis |url=http://www.spinellis.gr/pubs/jrnl/2002-ieeetit-npvirus/html/npvirus.html |title=Reliable identification of bounded-length viruses is NP-complete]. ''|journal=IEEE Transactions on Information Theory'', |volume=49( |issue=1):280–284, |pages=280–4 |date=January 2003. [http://dx.|doi.org/10.1109/TIT.2002.806137 doi:=10.1109/TIT.2002.806137]}}

{{refend}}

[[Category:Types of malware]]