[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Fri, 9 Dec 2016 01:05:35 +0100
From: Shiz <hi@...z.me>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: ldd not working on ET_EXEC executables
> On 8 Dec 2016, at 23:41, Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Dec 08, 2016 at 04:30:42PM -0600, Laine Gholson wrote:
>> You mean RANDMMAP? PaX's RANDMMAP feature ignoring the address your requesting it (without MAP_FIXED) is perfectly valid, to quote POSIX:
>> "When MAP_FIXED is not set, the implementation uses addr in an implementation-defined manner to arrive at pa."
>> mmap2(0x10000, 73728, PROT_READ|PROT_EXEC, MAP_PRIVATE, 3, 0) = 0x1234abcd
>
> It's _valid_, but it's a bad implementation choice; it makes it
> impossible to request a particular range, which is necessary for
> ldso/ldd to load non-PIE programs.
Good. Position-dependent executables should not be used or supported.
- Shiz
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.
