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    [from the cache]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site