Re: [PATCH] [SECURITY] suid procs exec'd with bad 0,1,2 fds

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: Geert Uytterhoeven: "Re: [PATCH] [SECURITY] suid procs exec'd with bad 0,1,2 fds"
• Previous message: Linus Torvalds: "Re: [PATCH] [SECURITY] suid procs exec'd with bad 0,1,2 fds"
• Maybe in reply to: Zachary Amsden: "[PATCH] [SECURITY] suid procs exec'd with bad 0,1,2 fds"
• Next in thread: David S. Miller: "Re: [PATCH] [SECURITY] suid procs exec'd with bad 0,1,2 fds"

libc is remapped by the patch so that the most significant byte of
the addresses are 0.

Keep in mind that for some people, mappable address space size is a
treasured reasource. Or is it only done for libc.so?

Later,
David S. Miller
davem@dm.cobaltmicro.com

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.altern.org/andrebalsa/doc/lkml-faq.html

• Next message: Geert Uytterhoeven: "Re: [PATCH] [SECURITY] suid procs exec'd with bad 0,1,2 fds"
• Previous message: Linus Torvalds: "Re: [PATCH] [SECURITY] suid procs exec'd with bad 0,1,2 fds"
• Maybe in reply to: Zachary Amsden: "[PATCH] [SECURITY] suid procs exec'd with bad 0,1,2 fds"
• Next in thread: David S. Miller: "Re: [PATCH] [SECURITY] suid procs exec'd with bad 0,1,2 fds"