linux-kernel - Re: [RFC/PATCH] RLIMIT_ARG

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: <1204307756.6243.121.camel@lappy>
Date:	Fri, 29 Feb 2008 18:55:56 +0100
From:	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Michael Kerrisk <michael.kerrisk@...glemail.com>,
	aaw <aaw@...gle.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	michael.kerrisk@...il.com, carlos@...esourcery.com,
	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, drepper@...hat.com,
	mtk.manpages@...il.com
Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH] RLIMIT_ARG_MAX


On Fri, 2008-02-29 at 09:35 -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> 
> On Fri, 29 Feb 2008, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > 
> > You fail to mention that <23 will still fault the first time it tries to
> > grow the stack when you set rlimit_stack to 128k and actually supply
> > 128k of env+arg.
> 
> So? That's what rlimit_stack has always meant (and not just on Linux 
> either, afaik). That's not a bug, it's a feature. If the system has a 
> limited stack, it has a limited stack. That's what RLIMIT_STACK means.

Well, I agree with that point. It just that apparently POSIX does not.
According to Michael POSIX does not consider the arg+env array part of
the stack proper.



--
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/