full-disclosure - Linux Exec Shield (was: Linux (in)security)

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

From: chris+fulldisc at ruvolo.net (Chris Ruvolo)
Subject: Linux Exec Shield (was: Linux (in)security)

On Wed, Oct 22, 2003 at 10:16:02AM -0700, Edward W. Ray wrote:
> Linux is the hands of someone with no interest or regard for security is the
> same as Windows or any other OS in the hands of the same clueless
> individual.  The main difference between the Linux and Unix variants (i.e.
> BSD, Solaris, HP-UX) is that they have already learned their lesson regarded
> buffer overflows and kernel hardening and allowed the user more control in
> securing their systems.  M$ has not, and that is unfortunate.

Speaking about kernel hardening, I was wondering if anyone on the list could
comment on Ingo Molnar's Exec Shield Linux kernel patches.

How effective do you think they are?  Would it actually make some holes more
difficult to exploit?  Impossible to exploit?  Obviously its not a 100%
blanket protection against buffer overflows (as acknowledged by the author),
but does anyone here think it could be worthwhile?

Details and patches are here:
	http://people.redhat.com/mingo/exec-shield/ANNOUNCE-exec-shield
	http://people.redhat.com/mingo/exec-shield/

Thanks,
-Chris
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 232 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.grok.org.uk/pipermail/full-disclosure/attachments/20031022/55d40bd3/attachment.bin