On Thu, 10 May 2007 06:56:55 -0400, Thomas Dickey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Thu, May 10, 2007 at 02:20:07AM +0200, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>>
>> Why does lynx need an executable stack?
> It doesn't. The error message states that liblzo requires the
> executable stack.
Beg pardon. I missed that. But still, the ability to execute
writable segments of memory is the source of many security concerns,
and this is not just the execmem capability, but the execstack. I
can see execmem being used for run-time generation of code (JIT
compilation for java, for example).
I am not convinced liblzo actually _needs_ run time code
generation.
manoj
--
Take an astronaut to launch.
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
