Subject: Re: Collecting NX information
From: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>
To: John Richard Moser <nigelenki@comcast.net>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ubuntu-hardened@lists.ubuntu.com
In-Reply-To: <4248520E.1070602@comcast.net>
References: <42484B13.4060408@comcast.net>
	 <1112035059.6003.44.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org>
	 <4248520E.1070602@comcast.net>
Content-Type: text/plain
Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 20:55:20 +0200
Message-Id: <1112036121.6003.46.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1120
Lines: 33

On Mon, 2005-03-28 at 13:50 -0500, John Richard Moser wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> 
> 
> Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> >>As I understand, PT_GNU_STACK uses a single marking to control whether a
> >>task gets an executable stack and whether ASLR is applied to the
> >>executable.
> > 
> > 
> > you understand wrongly.
> > 
> > PT_GNU_STACK just sets the exec permission for the stack (and the heap
> > now mirrors the stack). Nothing more nothing less.
> > 
> 
> So then this would be slightly more useful than I had previously
> thought, bringing control over the randomization as well?

actually Linus was really against adding non-related things to this
flag. And I think he is right...

Now.. do you have any examples of when you want a binary marked for no-
randomisation ?? (eg something the setarch flag won't fix/won't be good
enough for)

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/