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

Peter T. Breuer (ptb@it.uc3m.es)
Tue, 4 Aug 1998 13:01:49 +0200 (MET DST)

Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
Next message: Jakub Jelinek: "Re: floating-point abuse in 2.1.113"
Previous message: Jakub Jelinek: "Re: How to extend the task_struct?"
In reply to: Alan Cox: "Re: [PATCH] [SECURITY] suid procs exec'd with bad 0,1,2 fds"
Next in thread: Alan Cox: "Re: [PATCH] [SECURITY] suid procs exec'd with bad 0,1,2 fds"
Reply: Alan Cox: "Re: [PATCH] [SECURITY] suid procs exec'd with bad 0,1,2 fds"

"A month of sundays ago Alan Cox wrote:"
>
> Actually a _lot_ of people run the non-excutable stack and related
> patches. They don't break anything, they stop a lot of the "I read bugtraq

As I remember, they broke gdb.

I saw some other funny effects later and backed them out.

Peter ptb@it.uc3m.es

-
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: Jakub Jelinek: "Re: floating-point abuse in 2.1.113"
Previous message: Jakub Jelinek: "Re: How to extend the task_struct?"
In reply to: Alan Cox: "Re: [PATCH] [SECURITY] suid procs exec'd with bad 0,1,2 fds"
Next in thread: Alan Cox: "Re: [PATCH] [SECURITY] suid procs exec'd with bad 0,1,2 fds"
Reply: Alan Cox: "Re: [PATCH] [SECURITY] suid procs exec'd with bad 0,1,2 fds"