linux-kernel - Re: [patch] remove MNT_NOEXEC check for PROT

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <4516C9D0.3080606@aknet.ru>
Date:	Sun, 24 Sep 2006 22:09:20 +0400
From:	Stas Sergeev <stsp@...et.ru>
To:	Ulrich Drepper <drepper@...hat.com>
Cc:	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
	Hugh Dickins <hugh@...itas.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>,
	Linux kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [patch] remove MNT_NOEXEC check for PROT_EXEC mmaps

Ulrich Drepper wrote:
> The consensus has been to add the same checks to mprotect.  They were
> not left out intentionally.
But how about the anonymous mmap with PROT_EXEC set?
This is exactly what the malicious loader will do, it
won't do the shared (or private) file-backed mmap.
So your technique doesn't restrict the malicious
loaders, including the potential script loader you
were referring to. It doesn't even make their life
any harder. Only the properly-written programs suffer.
Or, in case of ceasing to use noexec - the security.

-
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/