| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20070111154957.GG4791@sergelap.austin.ibm.com> Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2007 09:49:57 -0600 From: "Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@...ibm.com> To: Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi> Cc: "Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@...ibm.com>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>, Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>, Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ibm.com>, akpm@...l.org, kjhall@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, safford@...f.watson.ibm.com Subject: Re: mprotect abuse in slim Quoting Pekka Enberg (penberg@...helsinki.fi): > On 1/10/07, Serge E. Hallyn <serue@...ibm.com> wrote: > >But since it looks like you just munmap the region now, shouldn't a > >subsequent munmap by the app just return -EINVAL? that seems appropriate > >to me. > > Applications don't know about revoke and neither should they. > Therefore close(2) and munmap(2) must work the same way they would for > non-revoked inodes so that applications can release resources > properly. > > Pekka Right, but is returning -EINVAL to userspace on munmap a problem? It may not have been expected before, but it shouldn't break anything... Thanks for the tw other patches - I'll give them a shot and check out current munmap behavior just as soon as I get a chance. thanks, -serge - 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