695.612.8VL - Operating Systems Security

Course Topics

• Intro to OS Security
• User/Kernel Isolation
• Privilege Boundaries
• Authentication
• Authorization/Auditing
• Virtual Memory Security
• Hardware/Software Fault Compensation
• Process Security/Tracing
• Protecting the OS from Itself
• Linux Capabilities/Drivers
• Virtualization
• Mobile Security I
• Mobile Security II/ SELinux
• CFG

Course Goals

Through hands-on experimentation, students will gain an understanding of how hardware and software constructs protect modern operating systems.

Course Learning Outcomes (CLOs)

• Identify and describe critical security boundaries related to OS and hardware.
• Utilize kernel-level debuggers to examine system memory.
• Understand the security (and risks) of virtualization techniques
• Apply OS Security Internals to help identify and eradicate malicious software and rootkits

Textbooks

Recommended

Russinovich, Mark, et al. (2017). Windows Internals 7th Edition: Part 1. Microsoft Press.

ISBN-10: 0-7356-8418-9 ISBN-13: 978-0-7356-8418-8

Levin, Jonathan. (2016). *OS Internals: Volume III Security & Insecurity Technologeeks Press.

ISBN-10: 0-9910-5553-5 ISBN-13: 978-0-9910-5553-1

Other Materials & Online Resources

Additional Reading Resources

1. Windows Internals: Part 1, 7th Edition.  Mark Russinovich, et al
2. Windows Internals: Part 1, 6th Edition.  Mark Russinovich, et al
3. Windows Internals: Part 2, 6th Edition. Mark Russinovich, et al
4. MacOS and iOS Internals: Volume I: User Mode. Jonathan Levin
5. MacOS and iOS Internals: Volume III: Security and Insecurity. Jonathan Levin
6. The Design and Implementation of the FreeBSD Operating System 2nd Edition. Marshall Kirk McKusick, et al.
7. Android Security Internals: An In-Depth Guide to Android’s Security Architecture. Nikolay Elenkov
8. Android Internals: Power User’s View. Jonathan Levin
9. Operating System Security (Synthesis Lectures on Information Security, Privacy, and Trust) Trent Jaeger
10. Intel 64 and IA-32 Architectures Software Developer’s Manuals. http://www.intel.com/products/processor/manuals/
11. Assembly Language for x86 Processors, 6th ed. Kip Irvine
12. Inside Windows Debugging: Practical Debugging and Tracing Strategies. Tarik Soulami
13. Computer Systems: A Programmer’s Perspective, 2nd ed. Randal Bryant.
14. Linkers & Loaders. John R. Levine

Various research papers related to operating system security, hardware security, and debugging.

Required Software

You will have access to an VMWare "D2L Learning Space” account which provides the ability to download a variety of software (including VMWare) that is needed to complete this course. In addition, you will have access to the Microsoft Azure Tools platform that will allow you to download Microsoft Windows and Visual Studio. Please refer to the VM Environments PDF, located in Canvas, for further information. In addition, be sure to check Canvas frequently for the most up-to-date information.

Student Coursework Requirements

It is expected that each module will take approximately 7–10 hours per week to complete. Here is an approximate breakdown: reading the assigned sections of the texts (approximately 3–4 hours per week) as well as some outside reading, listening to the audio annotated slide presentations (approximately 2–3 hours per week), and writing assignments (approximately 2–3 hours per week).

This course will consist of the following basic student requirements:

Preparation and Participation (10% of Final Grade Calculation)

You are responsible for carefully reading all assigned material and being prepared for discussion. The majority of readings are from the course text. Additional reading may be assigned to supplement text readings.

Evaluation of preparation and participation is based on contribution to discussions.

Preparation and participation are evaluated by the following grading elements:

1. Timeliness (50%)
2. Critical Thinking (50%)

Preparation and participation are graded as follows:

• 100–90 = A—Timeliness [regularly participates; all required postings; early in discussion; throughout the discussion]; Critical Thinking [rich in content; full of thoughts, insight, and analysis].
• 89–80 = B—Timeliness [frequently participates; all required postings; some not in time for others to read and respond]; Critical Thinking [substantial information; thought, insight, and analysis has taken place].
• 79–70 = C—Timeliness [infrequently participates; all required postings; most at the last minute without allowing for response time]; Critical Thinking [generally competent; information is thin and commonplace].
• <70 = F—Timeliness [rarely participates; some, or all required postings missing]; Critical Thinking [rudimentary and superficial; no analysis or insight is displayed].

Assignments (35% of Final Grade Calculation)

Assignments will include a mix of qualitative assignments (e.g. literature reviews, model summaries), quantitative problem sets, and case study updates. Include a cover sheet with your name and assignment identifier. Also include your name and a page number indicator (i.e., page x of y) on each page of your submissions.

All assignments are due according to the dates in the Calendar.

Late submissions will be deducted 5 points each day the assignment is late. Submissions beyond 7 days will be accepted for a max score of 50%.

Qualitative assignments are evaluated by the following grading elements:

1. Each part of question is answered (20%)
2. Writing quality and technical accuracy (30%) (Writing is expected to meet or exceed accepted graduate-level English and scholarship standards. That is, all assignments will be graded on grammar and style as well as content.)
3. Rationale for answer is provided (20%)
4. Examples are included to illustrate rationale (15%) (If you do not have direct experience related to a particular question, then you are to provide analogies versus examples.)
5. Outside references are included (15%)

Qualitative assignments are graded as follows:

• 100–90 = A—All parts of question are addressed; Writing Quality/ Rationale/ Examples/ Outside References [rich in content; full of thought, insight, and analysis].
• 89–80 = B—All parts of the question are addressed; Writing Quality/ Rationale/ Examples/ Outside References [substantial information; thought, insight, and analysis has taken place].
• 79–70=C—Majority of parts of the question are addressed; Writing Quality/ Rationale/ Examples/ Outside References [generally competent; information is thin and commonplace].
• <70=F—Some parts of the question are addressed; Writing Quality/ Rationale/ Examples/ Outside References [rudimentary and superficial; no analysis or insight displayed].

Quantitative assignments are evaluated by the following grading elements:

1. Each part of question is answered (20%)
2. Assumptions are clearly stated (20%)
3. Intermediate derivations and calculations are provided (25%)
4. Answer is technically correct and is clearly indicated (25%)
5. Answer precision and units are appropriate (10%)

Quantitative assignments are graded as follows:

• 100–90 = A—All parts of question are addressed; All assumptions are clearly stated; All intermediate derivations and calculations are provided; Answer is technically correct and is clearly indicated; Answer precision and units are appropriate.
• 89–80 = B—All parts of question are addressed; All assumptions are clearly stated; Some intermediate derivations and calculations are provided; Answer is technically correct and is indicated; Answer precision and units are appropriate.
• 79–70=C—Most parts of question are addressed; Assumptions are partially stated; Few intermediate derivations and calculations are provided; Answer is not technically correct but is indicated; Answer precision and units are indicated but inappropriate.
• <70=F—Some parts of the question are addressed; Assumptions are not stated; Intermediate derivations and calculations are not provided; The answer is incorrect or missing; The answer precision and units are inappropriate or missing.

Course (Team or Individual) Project (30% of Final Grade Calculation)

There will be two (2) course projects that will be assigned throughout the course.

The course projects are evaluated by the following grading elements:

1. Student preparation and participation (as described in Course Project Description) (40%)
2. Student technical understanding of the course project topic (as related to individual role that the student assumes and described in the Course Project Description) (20%)
3. Team preparation and participation (as described in Course Project Description) (20%)
4. Team technical understanding of the course project topic (as related to the Customer Team roles assumed by the students and the Seller Team roles assumed by the students and described in the Course Project Description) (20%)

Course Project is graded as follows:

• 100–90 = A—Student Preparation and Participation/ Team Preparation and Participation [individual/ team roles and responsibilities well defined and understood; individual/ team well versed in use of Adobe Connect; individual/ team work product(s) agreed to, well prepared and available to all team members/ instructors]; Student Understanding/ Team Understanding [rich in content; full of thought, insight, and analysis].
• 89–80 = B—Student Preparation and Participation/ Team Preparation and Participation [individual/ team roles and responsibilities well defined and understood; individual/ team well versed in use of Adobe Connect; individual/ team work product(s) agreed to and prepared]; Student Understanding/ Team Understanding [substantial information; thought, insight, and analysis has taken place].
• 79–70 = C—Student Preparation and Participation/ Team Preparation and Participation [individual/ team roles and responsibilities agreed to; individual/ team well versed in use of Adobe Connect; individual/ team work product(s) prepared]; Student Understanding/ Team Understanding [generally competent; information is thin and commonplace].
• <70 = F—Student Preparation and Participation/ Team Preparation and Participation [individual/ team roles and responsibilities not well understood; individual/ team has difficult with use of Adobe Connect; individual/ team work product(s) partially prepared]; Student Understanding/ Team Understanding [rudimentary and superficial; no analysis or insight displayed].

Exams (25% of Final Grade Calculation, combined from 10% for Midterm and 15% for Final)

You will have one week to complete the exams and they will be due by 11:59PM roughly one week from their release. You may use the course text, lecture notes, and other course content to complete the exams.

The exams are evaluated by the following grading elements:

1. Each part of question is answered (20%)
2. Writing quality and technical accuracy (30%) (Writing is expected to meet or exceed accepted graduate-level English and scholarship standards. That is, all assignments will be graded on grammar and style as well as content.)
3. Rationale for answer is provided (20%)
4. Examples are included to illustrate rationale (15%) (If a student does not have direct experience
5. related to a particular question, then the student is to provide analogies versus examples.)
6. Outside references are included (15%)

Exams are graded as follows:

• 100–90 = A—All parts of question are addressed; Writing Quality/ Rationale/ Examples/ Outside References [rich in content; full of thought, insight, and analysis].
• 89–80 = B—All parts of the question are addressed; Writing Quality/ Rationale/ Examples/ Outside References [substantial information; thought, insight, and analysis has taken place].
• 79–70 = C—Majority of parts of the question are addressed; Writing Quality/ Rationale/ Examples/ Outside References [generally competent; information is thin and commonplace].
• <70 = F—Some parts of the question are addressed; Writing Quality/ Rationale/ Examples/ Outside References [rudimentary and superficial; no analysis or insight displayed].

Grading Policy

Course Policies

Students are expected to participate during the lectures. I will often pause and ask questions to verify understanding, or take a deeper dive into a particular topic.

Academic Policies

Deadlines for Adding, Dropping and Withdrawing from Courses

Students may add a course up to one week after the start of the term for that particular course. Students may drop courses according to the drop deadlines outlined in the EP academic calendar (https://ep.jhu.edu/student-services/academic-calendar/). Between the 6th week of the class and prior to the final withdrawal deadline, a student may withdraw from a course with a W on their academic record. A record of the course will remain on the academic record with a W appearing in the grade column to indicate that the student registered and withdrew from the course.

Academic Misconduct Policy

All students are required to read, know, and comply with the Johns Hopkins University Krieger School of Arts and Sciences (KSAS) / Whiting School of Engineering (WSE) Procedures for Handling Allegations of Misconduct by Full-Time and Part-Time Graduate Students.

This policy prohibits academic misconduct, including but not limited to the following: cheating or facilitating cheating; plagiarism; reuse of assignments; unauthorized collaboration; alteration of graded assignments; and unfair competition. Course materials (old assignments, texts, or examinations, etc.) should not be shared unless authorized by the course instructor. Any questions related to this policy should be directed to EP’s academic integrity officer at ep-academic-integrity@jhu.edu.

Students with Disabilities - Accommodations and Accessibility

Johns Hopkins University values diversity and inclusion. We are committed to providing welcoming, equitable, and accessible educational experiences for all students. Students with disabilities (including those with psychological conditions, medical conditions and temporary disabilities) can request accommodations for this course by providing an Accommodation Letter issued by Student Disability Services (SDS). Please request accommodations for this course as early as possible to provide time for effective communication and arrangements.

For further information or to start the process of requesting accommodations, please contact Student Disability Services at Engineering for Professionals, ep-disability-svcs@jhu.edu.

Student Conduct Code

The fundamental purpose of the JHU regulation of student conduct is to promote and to protect the health, safety, welfare, property, and rights of all members of the University community as well as to promote the orderly operation of the University and to safeguard its property and facilities. As members of the University community, students accept certain responsibilities which support the educational mission and create an environment in which all students are afforded the same opportunity to succeed academically. 

For a full description of the code please visit the following website: https://studentaffairs.jhu.edu/policies-guidelines/student-code/

Classroom Climate

JHU is committed to creating a classroom environment that values the diversity of experiences and perspectives that all students bring. Everyone has the right to be treated with dignity and respect. Fostering an inclusive climate is important. Research and experience show that students who interact with peers who are different from themselves learn new things and experience tangible educational outcomes. At no time in this learning process should someone be singled out or treated unequally on the basis of any seen or unseen part of their identity. 
 
If you have concerns in this course about harassment, discrimination, or any unequal treatment, or if you seek accommodations or resources, please reach out to the course instructor directly. Reporting will never impact your course grade. You may also share concerns with your program chair, the Assistant Dean for Diversity and Inclusion, or the Office of Institutional Equity. In handling reports, people will protect your privacy as much as possible, but faculty and staff are required to officially report information for some cases (e.g. sexual harassment).

Course Auditing

When a student enrolls in an EP course with “audit” status, the student must reach an understanding with the instructor as to what is required to earn the “audit.” If the student does not meet those expectations, the instructor must notify the EP Registration Team [EP-Registration@exchange.johnshopkins.edu] in order for the student to be retroactively dropped or withdrawn from the course (depending on when the "audit" was requested and in accordance with EP registration deadlines). All lecture content will remain accessible to auditing students, but access to all other course material is left to the discretion of the instructor.