Vulnerability Development mailing list archives
Re: Smashing the Stack?
From: Sebastian Hegenbart <pr1 () u-n-f com>
Date: Sat, 20 Jul 2002 18:31:35 +0200
On Wed, 17 Jul 2002 21:11:21 +0100 strange () nsk yi org wrote:
On Wed, Jul 17, 2002 at 01:34:38PM -0400, Eric Thomas wrote:I went through this same mystery a few months ago. Apparently GCC pads the generated assembly for better memory alignment, which makes certain operations faster.And in some archs, legal. Non-align memory access is illegal in some archs, and non-existant in others (MIPS ignores the last 2/4(?) bits, anyway).
Note that writing to unaligned memory addresses is a CPU feature of the x86 family. The CPU will complain if the AC ( alignment check ) flag is set in the flag register. lates pr1
Current thread:
- Smashing the Stack? Jeremy Junginger (Jul 17)
- Re: Smashing the Stack? tide (Jul 17)
- Re: Smashing the Stack? Kim Reece (Jul 17)
- Re: Smashing the Stack? Vinay A. Mahadik (Jul 17)
- Re: Smashing the Stack? yatima (Jul 17)
- Re: Smashing the Stack? fila (Jul 18)
- Re: Smashing the Stack? Dan Kaminsky (Jul 18)
- Re: Smashing the Stack? fila (Jul 18)
- Re: Smashing the Stack? Gigi Sullivan (Jul 20)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- RE: Smashing the Stack? Eric Thomas (Jul 17)
- Re: Smashing the Stack? strange (Jul 17)
- Message not available
- Re: Smashing the Stack? Sebastian Hegenbart (Jul 20)
- Re: Smashing the Stack? strange (Jul 17)
- Re: Smashing the Stack? tide (Jul 17)
- Re: Smashing the Stack? Ali Saifullah Khan (Jul 17)