From owner-freebsd-security  Sun Feb  9 22:51:32 1997
Return-Path: <owner-security>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id WAA13260
          for security-outgoing; Sun, 9 Feb 1997 22:51:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: from godzilla.zeta.org.au (godzilla.zeta.org.au [203.2.228.19])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id WAA13248
          for <freebsd-security@FreeBSD.org>; Sun, 9 Feb 1997 22:51:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: (from bde@localhost) by godzilla.zeta.org.au (8.8.3/8.6.9) id RAA25451; Mon, 10 Feb 1997 17:46:03 +1100
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 1997 17:46:03 +1100
From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au>
Message-Id: <199702100646.RAA25451@godzilla.zeta.org.au>
To: freebsd-security@FreeBSD.org, roberto@keltia.freenix.fr
Subject: Re: buffer overruns
Sender: owner-security@FreeBSD.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

>The easiest way to close all this bugs is to make the stack non executable
>(from a processor standpoint) but I'm not sure you can do it in Intel
>processors.

Non-executable stack and data segments are natural for Intel processors.
I remember when I first tried crashme under Minix.  It went nowhere
because the data/stack segment was separate from the code segment (and
execute-protected).  I had to compile crashme with common I&D to work.

Bruce