full-disclosure - Re: [Dailydave] What RedHat doesn't want you toknow about ExecShield (without NX)

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

Message-ID: <37de4bc0705141836n6a229ac8w2143c5c32c9f1a0b@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 15 May 2007 11:36:11 +1000
From: "gary sweet" <gary.sweet.11@...il.com>
To: full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk
Subject: Re: [Dailydave] What RedHat doesn't want you
	toknow about ExecShield (without NX)

Brad Spengler wrote:
>>> The problem is there's nothing you can do about my attack,
>> There are likely similar attacks to the NULL ptr issue. Its just a
>> well known/predictable invalid pointer dereference.

> The attack I was referring to was the SELinux disabling, not the kernel exploit which allowed
> me to disable SELinux, although it is also since it's highly unlikely that PaX's UDEREF will be
> implemented in Fedora/RHEL there will be nothing you can do about the class of bugs you
> mention either.

This coming from someone who spends his time 'hunting for Linux kernel
vulnerabilities' .. bravo Brad :rolleyes:

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/