[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CA+55aFwDpwhcdUL+J=Gr1RbKeqEGFHnG2qNiGb6HcsEMnuAgyg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2017 10:15:31 -0700
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
Cc: Baoquan He <bhe@...hat.com>, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>, Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>,
Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: MAP_FIXED for ELF mappings
On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 10:12 AM, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> Yes, but we already have a new stack mapped and that was the point of
> the referenced CVE where the binary segments got mapped over the stack
> AFAIU.
Well, if you control the binary to the point where you just make the
ELF section map on top of the stack, what's the problem?
I mean, it's not a security issue. You could just have written the
code to do mmap() instead.
So I think this is a "crazy users can do crazy things, we're not
arbiters of taste" thing.
Linus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists