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]

Date:	Tue, 03 Oct 2006 17:01:22 +0200
From:	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
To:	Stas Sergeev <stsp@...et.ru>
Cc:	Linux kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
	Hugh Dickins <hugh@...itas.com>,
	Ulrich Drepper <drepper@...hat.com>, Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu
Subject: Re: [patch] remove MNT_NOEXEC check for PROT_EXEC mmaps

On Sat, 2006-09-30 at 13:42 +0400, Stas Sergeev wrote:
> Hello.
> 
> Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> >>/ wants to be able to mark more partitions as noexec,/
> > .... and then execute from them!
> > that's what is bothering me most about all of this.
> Do you mean "execute with ld.so", or "execute with PROT_EXEC mmap"?

no what bothers me that on the one hand you want no execute from the
partition, and AT THE SAME TIME want stuff to execute from there (being
libraries or binaries, same thing to me). That duality feels strange to
me, I could understand if you wanted noexec to be MORE strict; I fail to
understand why you want it LESS strict!
What breaks?


-
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/