You keep repeating the same nonsense over and over again, lot listening to anybody who doesn't agree with your position. If you don't want to have the noexec semantics on a filesystem, remove it. Not using the strict (mmap + protect) makes the whole thing completely meaningless since ld.so can be invoked directly. If anything breaks for you, remove the noexec mount flag. But don't argue that because noexec doesn't provide 100% security (which it cannot alone, of course) it needs not be strict at all. -- ➧ Ulrich Drepper ➧ Red Hat, Inc. ➧ 444 Castro St ➧ Mountain View, CA ❖
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
- Follow-Ups:
- 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
- References:
- 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]>
- Re: [patch] remove MNT_NOEXEC check for PROT_EXEC mmaps
- Prev by Date: Re: [patch] remove MNT_NOEXEC check for PROT_EXEC mmaps
- Next by Date: Re: wpa supplicant/ipw3945, ESSID last char missing
- 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):