Re: [PATCH] exec: do not leave bprm->interp on stack

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 12:10 AM, P J P <ppandit@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>   Hello Kees, Al,
>
> +-- On Sat, 27 Oct 2012, Kees Cook wrote --+
> | If we change binfmt_script to not make a recursive call, then we still
> | need to keep the interp change somewhere off the stack. I still think
> | my patchset is the least bad.
> |
> | Al, do you have something else in mind?
>
>   Guys, are there any updates further?
>
>   Al, what's your take on the *rare* extra call to request_module?

Without any other feedback, I'd like to use my minimal allocation
patch, since it fixes the problem and doesn't change any of the
semantics of how/when loading happens.

-Kees

-- 
Kees Cook
Chrome OS Security
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


[Index of Archives]     [Linux Ext4 Filesystem]     [Union Filesystem]     [Filesystem Testing]     [Ceph Users]     [Ecryptfs]     [AutoFS]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux Cachefs]     [Reiser Filesystem]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]     [CEPH Development]
  Powered by Linux