Re: [patch] remove MNT_NOEXEC check for PROT_EXEC mmaps

Stas Sergeev  wrote:
>The primary goal is to make access() to respect the "noexec".

Unfortunately, access() is insecure by design -- it is inherently
susceptible to race conditions (TOCTTOU attacks).  Therefore, I don't
think it is useful for enforcing security restrictions (such as
enforcing noexec in ld.so).
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

---

• References:
  • Re: [patch] remove MNT_NOEXEC check for PROT_EXEC mmaps
    • From: Stas Sergeev <[email protected]>
  • Re: [patch] remove MNT_NOEXEC check for PROT_EXEC mmaps
    • From: Arjan van de Ven <[email protected]>
  • Re: [patch] remove MNT_NOEXEC check for PROT_EXEC mmaps
    • From: Stas Sergeev <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [RFC PATCH] add pci_{request,free}_irq take #3
• Next by Date: Re: [PATCH] Fix WARN_ON / WARN_ON_ONCE regression
• Previous by thread: Re: [patch] remove MNT_NOEXEC check for PROT_EXEC mmaps
• Next by thread: Re: [patch] remove MNT_NOEXEC check for PROT_EXEC mmaps
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]