On Mon, Sep 17, 2001 at 06:18:51PM +0200, Yoann Vandoorselaere wrote:
>
> - Because of the 10% performance tradeoff ?
Is it really that high? It has been a while since I read the
whitepaper but I thought it was lower than that. In any case, how
about the 100% performance tradeoff of having your box hacked and
taken down?
> - Because we may experience false positive (thought I never seen one).
Again, it's been a while since I looked at the whitepaper but I cannot
imagine a "false positive" buffer over-run.
> Yes, that would do it.
Indeed.
> Would you volunteer for sending a proposal to the GLIBC people ?
I'm afraid my hacking skills are not quite at that level that is
needed to hack buffer/stack over-run checks into glibc. I would if I
could. Anyway, my time is consumed testing Mandrake Linux and hacking
it. :-)
b.
--
Brian J. Murrell
