[lkml]   [2004]   [Jan]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH] stronger ELF sanity checks v2

> On Tue, Jan 13, 2004 at 02:55:07AM +0100, Jesper Juhl wrote:
> > Here's the second version of my patch to add better sanity checks for
> > binfmt_elf
> I assume this breaks Brian Raiter's tiny ELF executables[1]. Even
> though these binaries are evil hacks that don't comply to standards
> and serve no serious purpose, I'm not sure what the purpose of the
> sanity checks is. Are there any risks associated with running
> non-compliant ELF executables? (Now that I mention it, the

You get vy ugly behaviour. If you compile executable with huge static
data, it will compile okay, link okay, *launch okay* and die on
segfault. That's wrong, it should have died on -ENOMEM during exec.

When do you have a heart between your knees?
[Johanka's followup: and *two* hearts?]
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:00    [W:0.088 / U:1.140 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site