lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1998]   [Aug]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [Fwd: [PATCH] [SECURITY] suid procs exec'd with bad 0,1,2 fds]
From
On Fri, 7 Aug 1998, Rene Janssen wrote:
> At 04:54 PM 8/6/98 -0400, you wrote:
> >IMPORTANT::
> >
> >Now, this leads to a way to have a truly secure system: an EXPAND-UP
> >STACK.

This is a foolish statement. As long as minor programming bugs result
in attackers being able to overwrite arbitrary memory, you don't have a
"truly secure system".

> >With an expand up stack, where the ESP increments rather than
> >decrements on a push,

Methinks thou art not well-versed in the ways of Intel iAPX86 assembly.

> This doesnt save you from buffer underflows :
> void giant_bug(char *b)
> {
> char buf[256], *p=buf+256;
> int x;
> for (x=0;x<1024;++x) *p-- = *b++;
> }
>
> expand-up stacks are not secure either.

I suspect that this kind of bug is three or four orders of magnitude
less common than the traditional buffer overflow, though.

Kragen


-
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:0.025 / U:0.180 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site