Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2015 17:11:39 -0500
From: Rich Felker <>
Subject: Re: Re: Fwd: x86 ROP mitigation

On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 01:52:07PM -0500, Daniel Micay wrote:
> Is that really the right approach vs. preventing hijacking of flow
> control via return pointers and function pointers? It doesn't really
> seem like there's an end game in mind where it actually prevents ROP
> rather than just removing many useful gadgets. Making useful ROP gadgets
> harder to find doesn't mean much, since tools are used to find them and
> the tools can be improved if it becomes necessary.
> i.e. why not just go with something like PaX's RAP

My understanding is that it's not ABI-compatible with non-RAP code, so
you'd essentially be going with a whole new ABI. If so, this is going
to be completely impractical for most users. Am I mistaken?


Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Please check out the Open Source Software Security Wiki, which is counterpart to this mailing list.

Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.