![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On Tue, 7 Jun 2005, Peter Staubach wrote: > Nagendra Singh Tomar wrote:> > >Hi all,> > The short version first. > >Is it OK for an application (a C library implementing malloc/calloc is > >also an application) to assume that the pages returned by the OS for heap > >allocation (either directly thru brk() or thru mmap(MAP_ANONYMOUS)) will > >be zero filled. > >> > An application which makes assumptions about the contents of newly allocated > memory would seem to be making very dangerous assumptions. Thats what glibc does. Ulrich confirmed that. I would say thats not a bad optimization on glibc's part as it does not really make sense to zero out a memory again in user space if we know for sure that new heap memory that kernel hands over to us will be zeroed. I'm not sure though whether this is a documented kernel ABI. > > Ignoring that, would it not be considered to be a security violation to hand > pieces of memory to applications without erasing the old contents of the > pages? I understand that for a desktop/server running Linux but not for an embedded box where all the applications that run on the box is controlled by you. Thanx, Tomar -- You have moved the mouse. Windows must be restarted for the changes to take effect. - 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: 2005-06-08 03:59 [W:0.051 / U:0.060 seconds] ©2003-2008 Jasper Spaans | |||||||||||||