On Thu, Jun 01, 2006 at 01:42:37PM +0200, Pavel Troller wrote: > > Pavel Troller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > But now I'm unsure, maybe we are on a false track. I just examined +relay > > > output again and I've found that immediately after the No-exec message the > > > program seems to continue normally. The problem (exception loop in msvcrt) > > > occurs many thousands lines later. I'm attaching preceding cca 1500 lines > > > of the log. > > > > It sounds like the no-exec workaround worked fine, and that you have > > some other problem. What does a +seh trace look like? > > > Hi Alexandre! > +seh shows the following: > > trace:seh:raise_exception code=c0000005 flags=0 addr=0x6d4d08b0 > trace:seh:raise_exception info[0]=00000008 > trace:seh:raise_exception info[1]=6d4d08b0 > trace:seh:raise_exception eax=00000001 ebx=7fe02cd8 ecx=7fe02cd8 > edx=00000003 esi=7fe02cd8 edi=6d4e0e90 > trace:seh:raise_exception ebp=7fb2fd70 esp=7fb2fd68 cs=0023 ds=002b es=002b > fs=006b gs=0063 flags=00010293 > trace:seh:call_stack_handlers calling handler at 0x401f00 code=c0000005 > flags=0 > trace:seh:_except_handler3 exception c0000005 flags=0 at 0x6d4d08b0 > handler=0x401f00 0x7fb2fa44 0x7fb2f984 semi-stub > trace:seh:_except_handler3 filter = 0x401e62 > trace:seh:_XcptFilter (-1073741819,0x7fb2f8c0) > trace:seh:_except_handler3 filter returned CONTINUE_SEARCH > trace:seh:_except_handler3 reached TRYLEVEL_END, returning > ExceptionContinueSearch > trace:seh:call_stack_handlers handler at 0x401f00 returned 1 > trace:seh:call_stack_handlers calling handler at 0x7b82be80 code=c0000005 > flags=0 > fixme:seh:check_no_exec No-exec fault triggered at 0x6d4d08b0, enabling > work-around > trace:seh:call_stack_handlers handler at 0x7b82be80 returned 0 > trace:seh:raise_exception code=c0000005 flags=0 addr=0x6d4db3ef > trace:seh:raise_exception info[0]=00000008 > trace:seh:raise_exception info[1]=6d4db3ef > trace:seh:raise_exception eax=7fb2fb28 ebx=797f2e80 ecx=7fb2fbec > edx=7fb2fcb0 esi=7fe02cd8 edi=6d4db3ef > trace:seh:raise_exception ebp=7fb2fb74 esp=7fb2faf8 cs=0023 ds=002b es=002b > fs=006b gs=0063 flags=00010246 > trace:seh:call_stack_handlers calling handler at 0x6d4b4bba code=c0000005 > flags=0 > trace:seh:_except_handler3 exception c0000005 flags=0 at 0x6d4db3ef > handler=0x6d4b4bba 0x7fb2f7d4 0x7fb2f714 semi-stub > trace:seh:_except_handler3 filter = 0x6d469332 > trace:seh:_except_handler3 filter returned CONTINUE_EXECUTION > trace:seh:call_stack_handlers handler at 0x6d4b4bba returned 0 > trace:seh:raise_exception code=c0000005 flags=0 addr=0x6d4d5d7b > trace:seh:raise_exception info[0]=00000008 > trace:seh:raise_exception info[1]=6d4d5d7b > trace:seh:raise_exception eax=7fb2fb28 ebx=797f2e80 ecx=7fb2fbec > edx=7fb2fcb0 esi=7fe02cd8 edi=6d4db3ef > trace:seh:raise_exception ebp=7fb2fb74 esp=7fb2faf8 cs=0023 ds=002b es=002b > fs=006b gs=0063 flags=00010246 > trace:seh:call_stack_handlers calling handler at 0x6d4b4bba code=c0000005 > flags=0 > trace:seh:_except_handler3 exception c0000005 flags=0 at 0x6d4d5d7b > handler=0x6d4b4bba 0x7fb2f7d4 0x7fb2f714 semi-stub > trace:seh:_except_handler3 filter = 0x6d469332 > trace:seh:_except_handler3 filter returned CONTINUE_EXECUTION > trace:seh:call_stack_handlers handler at 0x6d4b4bba returned 0 > > It looks that the first exception is the No-exec, then there is one more > lonely > one (at 0x6d4db3ef) and the third one (at 0x6d4d5d7b) is the first invocation > of the looping one - this one repeats in the log at the same address forever.
Please check the audit log whether a SELINUX audit event happened. (/var/log/audit/audit.log I think.) Ciao, Marcus