Bugtraq mailing list archives
Re: 2nd Linux kernel patch to remove stack exec
From: davem () JENOLAN RUTGERS EDU (David S. Miller)
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 1997 05:26:26 -0400
Perhaps some people don't understand, every single Linux binary on every platform supported that I know of, needs an executable stack to have signals work at all. When you type 'ls' a signal can get delivered to your shell to notify it that the child has exited. Just about every program needs signals that is of any use. If you make this change to take away execute permission on the users stack, all existing Linux binaries would break. Barring the transition nightmares, at a bare minimum someone would need to find a new way to handle multi-threaded signal dispatch in clone() processes that did not stick instructions on the signal stack like the current implementations do on every architecture. And even then, it would take a lot of effort and time to get from that point to it actually going into the kernel. Let this thread die a painless quick death... ---------------------------------------------//// Yow! 11.26 MB/s remote host TCP bandwidth & //// 199 usec remote TCP latency over 100Mb/s //// ethernet. Beat that! //// -----------------------------------------////__________ o David S. Miller, davem () caip rutgers edu /_____________/ / // /_/ ><
Current thread:
- Re: 2nd Linux kernel patch to remove stack exec Greg Stark (Apr 14)
- Re: 2nd Linux kernel patch to remove stack exec David S. Miller (Apr 14)
- non-executable stack Theodore Y. Ts'o (Apr 14)
- SNMP Information Paul Danckaert (Apr 14)
- Re: SNMP Information G P R (Apr 14)
- Re: 2nd Linux kernel patch to remove stack exec Solar Designer (Apr 14)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: 2nd Linux kernel patch to remove stack exec Miguel de Icaza (Apr 14)
- Re: 2nd Linux kernel patch to remove stack exec David S. Miller (Apr 14)