From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Apr 29 00:54:13 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 20465106564A for ; Fri, 29 Apr 2011 00:54:13 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rwmaillists@googlemail.com) Received: from mail-ww0-f50.google.com (mail-ww0-f50.google.com [74.125.82.50]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A2B958FC17 for ; Fri, 29 Apr 2011 00:54:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: by wwc33 with SMTP id 33so3451290wwc.31 for ; Thu, 28 Apr 2011 17:54:11 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:date:from:to:subject:message-id:in-reply-to :references:x-mailer:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=ipP5u7Md8MU9YDsk91XOzOXa+zrM4UNlQexowhqtr5E=; b=hyRMXTYMlSn1ay5HOnHJyElMgmXgnDYxmxyLUFPNXW4VhY42ligmx4jEBgBbu+Bhr4 Ny4w0EPBX9rK+1A86g+zJrZi/35HYXhnPD2LXA+cG1luFsyIXziu53wQz8bXNbTS41Vu cTTsmgDLved6V75/833i3mMH77TjwXn6XGJ+Q= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references:x-mailer :mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=jXGq4krIsxhNx/+cm7gc+CWRwqLW3qK/LB859kSjuxcNMagjymX/qr9D6Bq+Ob0ilT +wf+vqJeR9awfKvJThimha/6SSVUGpD+EpjEONzZJGPwudW6pWizMJoURh92dSU2Ez8v ScRNemLdfpNaPuLMsfRT4lhDU8QrLVeBpcbnw= Received: by 10.227.59.134 with SMTP id l6mr41116wbh.34.1304038451485; Thu, 28 Apr 2011 17:54:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gumby.homeunix.com (87-194-105-247.bethere.co.uk [87.194.105.247]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id z13sm1402593wbd.12.2011.04.28.17.54.09 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Thu, 28 Apr 2011 17:54:10 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2011 01:54:06 +0100 From: RW To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20110429015406.118fa49b@gumby.homeunix.com> In-Reply-To: <20110428171740.GA5840@stainmore> References: <20110425151536.GA61425@stainmore> <20110425175420.GA61811@stainmore> <20110425232908.4104e026@gumby.homeunix.com> <20110426025614.GA62745@stainmore> <20110426104151.596bcc19@gumby.homeunix.com> <20110427014554.1e4c5281@gumby.homeunix.com> <20110427095420.GA41208@kongemord.krig.net> <20110428001010.13a76d07@gumby.homeunix.com> <20110428171740.GA5840@stainmore> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.8 (GTK+ 2.22.1; i386-portbld-freebsd8.2) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: Password theft from memory? X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2011 00:54:13 -0000 On Thu, 28 Apr 2011 13:17:41 -0400 Bob Hall wrote: > On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 12:10:10AM +0100, RW wrote: > > I'm not saying that anonymous mappings used by malloc aren't > > zero-filled, just that it's not mentioned anywhere in the mmap man > > page. I think it's just taken as read. > > I just got what you're trying to say. Unfortunately, your quotes > mislead me about what you were concerned about. You're right, the man > page doesn't explicitly state whether anonymous mappings are zero > filled or not. Since man pages prioritize concision, I would expect > the page to explain how anonymous mappings are different from other > mappings, but not how they are the same. but they aren't the same - that's what the quotes were about. If the zero-filled extensions included whole pages that have the same status as the rest of the mapping then it would be reasonable to infer that anonymous mappings are similarly filled with zeroed-pages. What that man page is talking about is a small padding region at the end of a file-backed mapping that isn't really intended for use and presumably could get re-zeroed at any moment since it has no backing store. It seems to me to be unreasonable to infer anything about anonymous mappings from this.