When attempting to reverse engineer an executable file to uncover potential vulnerabilities, which technique is MOST effective for understanding the high-level logic and control flow without executing the code?
Performing static analysis of the code
Observing the behavior of the application through dynamic analysis
Conducting a fuzz test to identify potential memory leaks or crashes
Reviewing the application logs for error messages and system events
Static analysis is the process of examining the code without executing the program. It is the best technique for understanding the high-level logic and control flow of the executable without execution, which could reveal vulnerabilities and hidden functionalities. Dynamic analysis involves observing the system's behavior during execution, which does not fit the criteria of not executing the code. A fuzz test is used to feed a series of inputs to software to find vulnerabilities, but it is not a technique used for reverse engineering without execution. Application logs can provide runtime details, but they won't help reverse engineer binary code or understand high-level logic and control flow before execution.
Ask Bash
Bash is our AI bot, trained to help you pass your exam. AI Generated Content may display inaccurate information, always double-check anything important.
What are the primary methods used in static analysis?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
How does dynamic analysis differ from static analysis?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
What kinds of vulnerabilities can static analysis help identify?