From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Jan 14 11:03:30 2014
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EEE92467
 for <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>; Tue, 14 Jan 2014 11:03:30 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-wg0-x230.google.com (mail-wg0-x230.google.com
 [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c00::230])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8B0F018C9
 for <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>; Tue, 14 Jan 2014 11:03:30 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-wg0-f48.google.com with SMTP id x13so214209wgg.15
 for <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>; Tue, 14 Jan 2014 03:03:28 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
 h=mime-version:reply-to:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type;
 bh=QNxNFOSLTi2f4bDT4m7pdZuSiFxVvkhJR41PLFGSXLo=;
 b=ppzslKM+M6pI57oYqV9/zmoiyIViNHKo34hNrWbV6i2IJD+DYjuaMtXNt8GXbZ+F7o
 lWHhKcj09jM3wq0V6aGN5t9mhOt+qHSfj+zSziq7YpHerzmGFc/CeGwbCKvuC04m939q
 D99h7vq/wf+P+55ucv/f7rR1+Trqzrr+lWYQVKUuyiohh08//JMqL+TNWcUUa8b2RJL3
 JxeMGHqmUEC//lKATFTnQfBzMlvh5eP3OybqAM5LnisKl2/9M/A1U0ZZrx676VLChkZr
 Cl0qfVQPUcRVVEcovDL6uNBWqKRIQjkgHBiDvGBRodD/fwtNCAd2NyoRRImWAKUwi0dr
 l/TQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.194.236.9 with SMTP id uq9mr26513430wjc.31.1389697408846;
 Tue, 14 Jan 2014 03:03:28 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.216.19.132 with HTTP; Tue, 14 Jan 2014 03:03:28 -0800 (PST)
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2014 05:03:28 -0600
Message-ID: <CAHAXwYC8ScSRyGHSG0gzVG=YYfoSrVbJJ6afSZzhZEOa4L5_SQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Exploit Mitigation Techniques: an Update After 10 Years (Theo de
 Raadt)
From: David Noel <david.i.noel@gmail.com>
To: FreeBSD Questions Mailing List <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
Reply-To: David.I.Noel@gmail.com
List-Id: User questions <freebsd-questions.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-questions>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2014 11:03:31 -0000

http://tech.yandex.ru/events/yagosti/ruBSD/talks/1487/

I found an interesting talk the other day by OpenBSD's Theo de Raadt
discussing the various exploit mitigation techniques used by OpenBSD.
After outlining them he spent a few minutes talking about their
adoption by other operating systems. He was particularly critical of
the FreeBSD project for either not incorporating these techniques or
for incorporating them, but disabling them by default.

I'm not a systems developer so I have little basis for an opinion on
what he said. I was hoping someone here who was more knowledgeable in
that domain could chime in. Are the techniques he describes really the
cutting edge when it comes to operating system security? Again, I'm
not a systems guy, but I could see the value in the techniques he
described. On the other hand I could also see how things like address
space randomization could be dismissed as security through obscurity,
and stand as nothing more than a small roadblock one would have to
work around to compromise a system.

If these techniques are not worth implementing, what are their main
criticisms? If they are as useful as Theo seems to believe, what
efforts are underway to incorporate them into FreeBSD?

-David