Re: [PATCH] [SECURITY] suid procs exec'd with bad 0,1,2 fds

David S. Miller (davem@dm.cobaltmicro.com)
Tue, 4 Aug 1998 13:35:25 -0700

Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
Next message: Michael Nelson: "Re: 2.1.114 fails build on i386"
Previous message: Geert Uytterhoeven: "Re: floating-point abuse in 2.1.113"
Maybe in reply to: Zachary Amsden: "[PATCH] [SECURITY] suid procs exec'd with bad 0,1,2 fds"
Next in thread: Perry Harrington: "Re: [PATCH] [SECURITY] suid procs exec'd with bad 0,1,2 fds"
Reply: Perry Harrington: "Re: [PATCH] [SECURITY] suid procs exec'd with bad 0,1,2 fds"

From: Perry Harrington <pedward@sun4.apsoft.com>
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 1998 13:32:08 -0700 (PDT)

But what uses exec stacks, other than exploits?

Interpreter implementations for certain languages. Compiled languages
use the stack for trampoline code snippets. Linus mentioned this
already.

Later,
David S. Miller
davem@dm.cobaltmicro.com

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.altern.org/andrebalsa/doc/lkml-faq.html

Next message: Michael Nelson: "Re: 2.1.114 fails build on i386"
Previous message: Geert Uytterhoeven: "Re: floating-point abuse in 2.1.113"
Maybe in reply to: Zachary Amsden: "[PATCH] [SECURITY] suid procs exec'd with bad 0,1,2 fds"
Next in thread: Perry Harrington: "Re: [PATCH] [SECURITY] suid procs exec'd with bad 0,1,2 fds"
Reply: Perry Harrington: "Re: [PATCH] [SECURITY] suid procs exec'd with bad 0,1,2 fds"