Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | Date | Mon, 22 Dec 2003 12:25:58 +0100 | From | Ingo Molnar <> | Subject | Re: [test] exec-shield vs. paxtest 0.9.5 horrible results |
| |
* Gabor MICSKO <gmicsko@szintezis.hu> wrote:
> Any idea?
yes. Undo the patch below. The paxtest author decided to add this pointless mprotect(stackptr, PROT_EXEC) to make sure the test lists exec-shield as 'vulnerable' while listing PaX as non-vulnerable. I sent the fix but (not surprisingly) it was not added. Marketing via testsuite eh?
Ingo
--- paxtest-0.9.4/body.c +++ paxtest-0.9.5/body.c @@ -29,6 +29,7 @@ fflush( stdout ); if( fork() == 0 ) { + do_mprotect((unsigned long)argv & ~4095U, 4096, PROT_READ|PROT_WRITE|PROT_EXEC); doit(); } else { wait( &status ); - 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/
| |