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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4527FC8B.8010208@aknet.ru>
Date:	Sat, 07 Oct 2006 23:14:19 +0400
From:	Stas Sergeev <stsp@...et.ru>
To:	Ulrich Drepper <drepper@...hat.com>
Cc:	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
	Jakub Jelinek <jakub@...hat.com>,
	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
	Linux kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Hugh Dickins <hugh@...itas.com>
Subject: Re: [patch] honour MNT_NOEXEC for access()

Hello.

Ulrich Drepper wrote:
>> Now, as the access(X_OK) is fixed, would it be
>> feasible for ld.so to start using it?
> Just must be kidding.  No access control can be reliably implemented at
> userlevel.  There is no point starting something as stupid as this.
But in this case how can you ever solve the
problem of ld.so executing the binaries for which
the user does not have an exec permission?
Yes, the userspace apps usually should not enforce
the kernel's access control, but ld.so seems to be
the special case - it is a kernel helper after all,
so it have to be carefull and check what it does.

-
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

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ