lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1998]   [Aug]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] [SECURITY] suid procs exec'd with bad 0,1,2 fds
Date

-----Original Message-----
From: Peter T. Breuer <ptb@it.uc3m.es>
To: alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.rutgers.edu <linux-kernel@vger.rutgers.edu>
Date: Tuesday, August 04, 1998 7:12 AM
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [SECURITY] suid procs exec'd with bad 0,1,2 fds


>"A month of sundays ago Alan Cox wrote:"
>>
>> Actually a _lot_ of people run the non-excutable stack and related
>> patches. They don't break anything, they stop a lot of the "I read
>bugtraq
>
>As I remember, they broke gdb.
>
>I saw some other funny effects later and backed them out.
>
>Peter ptb@it.uc3m.es


Unless I am mistaken, Solar Designer fixed the gdb breakage, I believe
his first version of the patch was too picky about data segments being
executable.

However, several ways to defeat the patch and execute code through
other means have been discussed on bugtraq, and it was generally
concluded that any stack tricks pulled by the compiler or the OS will
not be able to stop all classes of overflows. Nevertheless, non-exec
stack on non-broken processors (i.e. not Intel) is a good idea.

I believe this is straying off-topic, any interested parties could
continue conversation via private email.

Zachary Amsden
amsden@andrew.cmu.edu



-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.altern.org/andrebalsa/doc/lkml-faq.html

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:43    [W:0.023 / U:0.400 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site