lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Mar]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    From
    Date
    SubjectRe: Non-Exec stack patches
    >>>>> On Wed, 24 Mar 2004 02:00:20 -0500, Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com> said:

    Jakub> But I think we should change the toolchain and generate it on
    Jakub> IA64 and PPC64 as well (only GCC would need changing,
    Jakub> emitting .section .note.GNU-stack,"",@progbits at the end of
    Jakub> every compile unit, ld takes care of the rest) exactly for
    Jakub> uniformity's sake and because you get ld.so handling free.

    I'm not following you on the "get ld.so handling free" part. How is
    that handling free?

    Jakub> GLIBC dynamic linker will take care of making the stack
    Jakub> executable if say a binary which doesn't need executable
    Jakub> stack depends on a shared library which needs executable
    Jakub> stack or even dlopens a library which needs executable stack.

    Actually, that's something that worries me. Somebody just needs to
    succeed in loading any shared object with the right PT_GNU_STACK
    header and then the entire program will be exposed to the risk of a
    writable stack. On ia64, I just don't see any need to ever implicitly
    turn on execute-permission on the stack, so why allow this extra
    backdoor?

    --david
    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 14:01    [W:0.020 / U:61.392 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site