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
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2006 08:33:26 +0400 From: Stas Sergeev <stsp@...et.ru> To: Hugh Dickins <hugh@...itas.com> Cc: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>, Ulrich Drepper <drepper@...hat.com>, Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu, Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>, Linux kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [patch] remove MNT_NOEXEC check for PROT_EXEC MAP_PRIVATE mmaps Hello. Hugh Dickins wrote: > since executables are typically mapped MAP_PRIVATE, I suspect > your patch will simply break mmap's intended MNT_NOEXEC check. The one with ld.so you mean? But its a user-space issue, I haven't seen anyone claiming the opposite (and you even explicitly confirmed it is). > I think you need to face up to the fact that "noexec" > doesn't suit your mount, and just leave it at that. But noone have answered this question: Which configuration is more secure - the one where all the user-writable fs are mounted with "noexec" (in old sense of noexec), or the one without "noexec" at all because I should no longer use it here and there (actually, everywhere)? > But I do concede that I'm reluctant to present that patch Alan > encouraged, adding a matching MNT_NOEXEC check to mprotect: it > would be consistent, and I do like consistency, but in this case > fear that change in behaviour may cause new userspace breakage. I can't think of a single real-life example where it will break something over whatever is broken already by the mmap check. But I am not encouraging such a change of course. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists