Home page logo
/

fulldisclosure logo Full Disclosure mailing list archives

Re: Talk in #grsecurity
From: Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2004 18:44:37 -0500

On Fri, 26 Mar 2004 23:10:02 +0100, Henk Stubbe <henk () herejezus nl>  said:

Spender sent me the alleged exploit for exec-shield... and it bypasses the
protections offered by exec-shield completely without the need for brute
forcing.

Does it actually bypass a protection that exec-shield claims to give, or
is it doing something that exec-shield doesn't claim to be able to stop?

There's no love lost between the pax and exec-shield crews:

http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=107209069402935&w=2
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=107209256604442&w=2

So I'd evaluate very carefully any claim made by either crew.  It's possible
that there is a real hole in exec-shield.  It's also possible that the
"exploit" is simply doing stuff that exec-shield won't stop by design -
remember that a design *goal* of exec-shield was to not be as kernel-intrusive
as pax, so it would have a smaller footprint and be less likely to break stuff
unintentionally.

Attachment: _bin
Description:


  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]
AlienVault