Re: [RFC] prevention of syscalls from writable segments, breaking bug exploits

From: David Huggins-Daines (dhd@eradicator.org)
Date: Wed Jan 03 2001 - 22:41:05 EST

Next message: Michael D. Crawford: ""Why We Should All Test the New Linux Kernel" on Advogato"
Previous message: Andi Kleen: "Re: [RFC] prevention of syscalls from writable segments, breaking bug exploits"
Next in thread: Pavel Machek: "Re: [RFC] prevention of syscalls from writable segments, breaking bug exploits"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de> writes:

> On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 10:20:37PM -0500, David Huggins-Daines wrote:
> > Dan Aloni <karrde@callisto.yi.org> writes:
> >
> > > This preliminary, small patch prevents execution of system calls which
> > > were executed from a writable segment.
> >
> > How does signal return work, then?
>
> Newer glibc sets a sa_restorer.

Hmm, maybe sigaction(2) should stop documenting it as "obsolete and
should not be used" then :-)

-- 
David Huggins-Daines		-		dhd@eradicator.org
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Next message: Michael D. Crawford: ""Why We Should All Test the New Linux Kernel" on Advogato"
Previous message: Andi Kleen: "Re: [RFC] prevention of syscalls from writable segments, breaking bug exploits"
Next in thread: Pavel Machek: "Re: [RFC] prevention of syscalls from writable segments, breaking bug exploits"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Jan 07 2001 - 21:00:17 EST