From owner-freebsd-arch Sat Jun 29 18:19:10 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C73B37B400 for ; Sat, 29 Jun 2002 18:19:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gnuppy.monkey.org (wsip68-15-8-100.sd.sd.cox.net [68.15.8.100]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2064243E06 for ; Sat, 29 Jun 2002 18:19:08 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from billh@gnuppy.monkey.org) Received: from billh by gnuppy.monkey.org with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 17OTMZ-0000Ur-00; Sat, 29 Jun 2002 18:18:51 -0700 Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2002 18:18:51 -0700 To: Terry Lambert Cc: Jake Burkholder , arch@FreeBSD.ORG, Bill Huey Subject: Re: Time to make the stack non-executable? Message-ID: <20020630011851.GA1889@gnuppy.monkey.org> References: <3D1E28ED.B67A5271@FreeBSD.org> <3D1E3126.C96FFAA5@mindspring.com> <20020629185554.I71376@locore.ca> <20020629232603.GA1361@gnuppy.monkey.org> <3D1E55E5.998DCEBA@mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3D1E55E5.998DCEBA@mindspring.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i From: Bill Huey Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Sat, Jun 29, 2002 at 05:50:45PM -0700, Terry Lambert wrote: > The real question is whether or not it would interfere with KSE > itself (Julian says "no"), and whether or not it would interfere > with anything else. I know that it will break signals, unless > the signals system is modified to pass the return address as an > argument. Stepping on that code is really dangerous now (as I > pointed out to Sean), sine it's one of the places that's really > in flux (particularly on the Alpha), according to Julian. That's probably up to the UTS system itself and how it handles upcalls. I don't remember anything in the uthreads using something like that currently, so that answer to that is probably "no" at this time. That's up the UTS folks in question. > It would be really nice to be immune from stack overflow based > hacks. That probably impossible in "C" without consideration to the language facilities and some kind of runtime bounds checking. bill To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message