Re: Non-Exec stack patches
From: David Mosberger
Date: Wed Mar 24 2004 - 02:17:55 EST
>>>>> On Wed, 24 Mar 2004 02:00:20 -0500, Jakub Jelinek <jakub@xxxxxxxxxx> said:
Jakub> But I think we should change the toolchain and generate it on
Jakub> IA64 and PPC64 as well (only GCC would need changing,
Jakub> emitting .section .note.GNU-stack,"",@progbits at the end of
Jakub> every compile unit, ld takes care of the rest) exactly for
Jakub> uniformity's sake and because you get ld.so handling free.
I'm not following you on the "get ld.so handling free" part. How is
that handling free?
Jakub> GLIBC dynamic linker will take care of making the stack
Jakub> executable if say a binary which doesn't need executable
Jakub> stack depends on a shared library which needs executable
Jakub> stack or even dlopens a library which needs executable stack.
Actually, that's something that worries me. Somebody just needs to
succeed in loading any shared object with the right PT_GNU_STACK
header and then the entire program will be exposed to the risk of a
writable stack. On ia64, I just don't see any need to ever implicitly
turn on execute-permission on the stack, so why allow this extra
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/