Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2012 14:45:21 +0800 From: orc <orc@...server.ru> To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: noexecstack On Sun, 5 Aug 2012 23:35:36 +0200 Daniel Cegiełka <daniel.cegielka@...il.com> wrote: > Vasily Kulikov published a patch for nonexecutable stack for glibc in > Owl. > > http://openwall.com/lists/owl-dev/2012/08/05/1 > http://openwall.com/lists/owl-dev/2012/08/05/3 > > Should we support this in the musl? > > The patch for musl asm files is attached... > > best regards, > Daniel Correct me if I'm wrong, but this is ugly stuff. - binutils ld has -z noexecstack command line option. - this (GNU_STACK) is binutils-specific (tinycc, for example, does not generate ELFs with that section, and future direction should be on that plain ELFs without any gnuish extensions IMO) - Kernel sets executable stack by default, kernel can be patched not to do that (that's one line patch per architecture) - binutils can be patched to not produce ELFs with executable stack by default While some of options I listed here may harm some GCC or binutils internals (I don't know), I see an utility that comes with grsecurity patches (paxctl) that operates that section (GNU_STACK), converting it into it's own. I tested a system with patched binutils and kernel (but binutils patch here will be enough) without any problems.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.