[lkml]   [2008]   [Sep]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [patch] Add basic sanity checks to the syscall execution patch
On Fri, 05 Sep 2008 11:43:31 +0200 wrote:

> consider how your whole patch is based on one big self-contradiction.
> you already assume that the attacker *can* modify arbitrary kernel
> memory (even the otherwise *read-only* syscall table at that), but at
> the very same time you're saying he *can't* use the same powers to
> patch out your 'protection' or do many other things to evade it. as
> it is, it's cargo cult security at its best, reminding one on the
> Vista kernel's similar 'protection' mechanism for the service
> descriptor tables...

so I'm not going to say that the patch is important or good;
it's the result of ben mentioning the idea on irc and me thinking "sure
lets see what it would take and cost".
Nothing more than that

If you want to reach me at my work email, use
For development, discussion and tips for power savings,

 \ /
  Last update: 2008-09-05 18:09    [W:0.094 / U:4.932 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site