[dryoulli]

Many people entering reverse engineering focus heavily on memory corruption primitives (BOF, UAF, heap spray), but in modern systems, logic vulnerabilities are often more impactful and stealthy.
A logic bug doesn’t rely on crashing the program or corrupting memory. Instead, it abuses incorrect assumptions made by developers about state, trust boundaries, or execution flow.
Examples include:

• Privileged helpers trusting user-controlled inputs after an initial check
  
• State machines that can be desynchronized (TOCTOU-style logic flaws)
  
• Security decisions split across components without a single source of truth
  

What makes logic bugs dangerous is that:

• They often survive mitigations like ASLR, DEP, SIP, or hardened runtimes
  
• They are harder to detect with fuzzers
  
• They usually look like “intended behavior” at first glance
  

In real-world targets, I’ve found that reading the code as a designer, not as an attacker, reveals these flaws much faster.
If you can model how the system thinks, exploitation becomes a consequence, not a goal.
Curious to hear how others approach logic-bug hunting during reversing.

This forum account is currently banned. Ban Length: Permanent (N/A Remaining)
Ban Reason: Contact Administration.