Nmap Security Scanner
*Intro
*Ref Guide
*Install Guide
*Download
*Changelog
*Book
*Docs
Security Lists
*Nmap Hackers
*Nmap Dev
*Bugtraq
*Full Disclosure
*Pen Test
*Basics
*More
Security Tools
*Pass crackers
*Sniffers
*Vuln Scanners
*Web scanners
*Wireless
*Exploitation
*Packet crafters
*More
Site News
Site Search:
Exploit World
Advertising
About/Contact
Credits
Sponsors:




Vulnerability Development mailing list archives

Re: Beating memory address randomization (secuirty) features in Unix/Linux
From: "Mike Davis" <mdavis () imperfectnetworks com>
Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2006 15:56:58 -0400

wouldnt this also apply to the propolice stack ramdomization as well? not just pax

-phar

----- Original Message ----- From: "Don Bailey" <don.bailey () gmail com>
To: <vuln-dev () securityfocus com>
Sent: Monday, April 03, 2006 2:09 PM
Subject: Re: Beating memory address randomization (secuirty) features in Unix/Linux


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

I believe they're talking about distros WITH RANDOMIZATION IE PAX enabled.


Obviously. My point is that the original poster didn't
seem to be concerned with more advanced issues,
like PaX. Rather, they just wanted to learn how to
evade the basic stack base randomization code
employed on many popular Linux distros.

Let them worry about things like PaX later.

Also, tell me how often is PaX/grsec employed?
Clearly, not often. Distros aren't even interested in
deploying it as much as they are interested in
the new vanilla kernel way of integrating security
into the core code. That code still has a long way
to go.

Don "north" Bailey

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP Desktop 9.0.5 (Build 5050)

iQA/AwUBRDFk8l/Ie1ANMtLuEQK9+ACfbxWb4zSGmebcNduqXtqPyBk3PGAAoMJR
rdo4rvXNExT1UBj3OnF8P/EE
=iFTb
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----





  By Date           By Thread  

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