bugtraq - Re: Buffer overflow prevention

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.50.0308192107290.2830-100000@dzyngiel.ipartners.pl>
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2003 21:12:20 +0200 (EEST)
From: Mariusz Woloszyn <emsi@...rtners.pl>
To: Crispin Cowan <crispin@...unix.com>
Cc: Theo de Raadt <deraadt@....openbsd.org>,
	"" <mtinberg@...urepipe.com>, "" <bugtraq@...urityfocus.com>,
	"" <peter@...steddebian.org>
Subject: Re: Buffer overflow prevention


On Mon, 18 Aug 2003, Crispin Cowan wrote:

> OTOH, I like the variable sorting hack in ProPolice, and thought about
> implementing it, but chose instead to concentrate on PointGuard, which
> protects all of the cases that ProPolice variable sorting protects, and
> then some.
>
I's not just a "hack" it's a great improvement that distinguish ProPolice
from Stackguard.
To be honest, it's the main reason why I migrated form SG to PP.
Beside that PP protects function arguments unlike SG!

To recapitulate: SG vs PP 0:2.

-- 
Mariusz Wo³oszyn
Internet Security Specialist, GTS - Internet Partners