Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 10:20:37PM -0500, David Huggins-Daines wrote: > > Dan Aloni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > This preliminary, small patch prevents execution of system calls which > > > were executed from a writable segment. > > > > How does signal return work, then? > > Newer glibc sets a sa_restorer. Hmm, maybe sigaction(2) should stop documenting it as "obsolete and should not be used" then :-) -- David Huggins-Daines - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Re: [RFC] prevention of sys... Dan Hollis
- Re: [RFC] prevention of sys... Gerhard Mack
- Re: [RFC] prevention of syscalls from writable s... Andi Kleen
- Re: [RFC] prevention of syscalls from writable segmen... Erik Mouw
- Re: [RFC] prevention of syscalls from writable segmen... Nicolas Noble
- Re: [RFC] prevention of syscalls from writable segmen... Jeff Dike
- Re: [RFC] prevention of syscalls from writable segmen... Dan Aloni
- Re: [RFC] prevention of syscalls from writable segmen... Alan Cox
- Re: [RFC] prevention of syscalls from writable segmen... David Huggins-Daines
- Re: [RFC] prevention of syscalls from writable s... Andi Kleen
- Re: [RFC] prevention of syscalls from writab... David Huggins-Daines
- Re: [RFC] prevention of syscalls from writable segmen... Pavel Machek
- Re: [RFC] prevention of syscalls from writable segmen... Mark Zealey