UNIX admin wrote:
so even if the virus did do a successful buffer overrun and managed to get a
parent process's shell, it'd still end up causing no harm because regular user
can't touch the system.
This is all very well and true. But for any system that mostly used by
a single person (such
On Fri, 2007-06-15 at 06:32 -0700, UNIX admin wrote:
> 1. SPARC (and nowdays AMD and intel) processors support a so-called "no
> execution stack" bit, and this bit is set to 1 by default;
> what that means is, you can't execute any malicious code that you put on the
> stack, the hardware won't al
> My guess is that as Linux gains more
> acceptance in the
> wider computing arena, in corporate circles and in
> consumer PCs, hackers
> will begin to see more opportunities at hacking 'NIX
> for profit or
> getting at sensitive personal data and the incidents
> of viruses aimed at
> 'NIX systems
> Please don't get into the arrogant belief that just
> because it is
> Solaris or any other UNIX variant that anti-virus is
> unnecessary. Virus
> writers haven't targeted 'NIX but that doesn't mean
> 'NIX is
> invulnerable.
It would appear that you're unfamiliar with the technical background of
