lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1999]   [Mar]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: Linux Buffer Overflow Security Exploits
Date

-----Original Message-----
From: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To: Sarah Addams <s.addams@telergy.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.rutgers.edu <linux-kernel@vger.rutgers.edu>
Date: 03 March 1999 20:27
Subject: Re: Linux Buffer Overflow Security Exploits


>> Excuse my ignorance, but would someone explain to me why Linux and other
=
>> Unices are vulnerable to buffer overflow exploits? I suspect it's =
>

>Because like basically all computers you don't have hardware type and
>size tags on all pointers. There are approaches to reduce the probability
>of that error but reading and checking code is the most productive. Logic
>errors tend to be as big a problem

Isn't it the case for Intel 386 and up processors, as is true for other
modern processors, that memory segments can be marked execute, read and/or
write by a process running at a sufficiently high privilege level. So if you
write your kernel to take advantage of these features, you could guard
against the case where a buffer overflow is used to sneak code into an
otherwise secure system?

I suppose my original question could be boiled down into:

Does a Linux (and/or other Unix) process inhabit a single read/write/execute
memory segment?



-
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.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:50    [W:0.086 / U:0.264 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site