BugTraq
Re: Buffer overflow prevention Aug 14 2003 05:26PM
Mariusz Woloszyn (emsi ipartners pl) (6 replies)
Re: Buffer overflow prevention Aug 14 2003 11:27PM
Shaun Clowes (shaun securereality com au) (1 replies)
Re: Buffer overflow prevention Aug 15 2003 06:48PM
Crispin Cowan (crispin immunix com) (1 replies)
Re: Buffer overflow prevention Aug 17 2003 11:09PM
Shaun Clowes (shaun securereality com au) (1 replies)
Re: Buffer overflow prevention Aug 17 2003 10:42PM
Crispin Cowan (crispin immunix com) (2 replies)
Heterogeneity as a form of obscurity, and its usefulness Aug 21 2003 02:00AM
Bob Rogers (rogers-bt2 rgrjr dyndns org) (1 replies)
Re: Heterogeneity as a form of obscurity, and its usefulness Aug 22 2003 03:56AM
Crispin Cowan (crispin immunix com) (1 replies)
Re: Heterogeneity as a form of obscurity, and its usefulness Aug 22 2003 06:21PM
Nicholas Weaver (nweaver CS berkeley edu)
Re: Buffer overflow prevention Aug 18 2003 06:07PM
Mark Handley (M Handley cs ucl ac uk) (1 replies)
Re: Buffer overflow prevention Aug 18 2003 08:11PM
Crispin Cowan (crispin immunix com)
Re: Buffer overflow prevention Aug 14 2003 07:37PM
Theo de Raadt (deraadt cvs openbsd org) (3 replies)
Re: Buffer overflow prevention Aug 16 2003 01:14PM
sauron (unixlabs noos fr)
Re: Buffer overflow prevention Aug 14 2003 09:14PM
Gerhard Strangar (gerhard brue net) (1 replies)
Theo de Raadt wrote:

> W^X is more than just stack protection. It means that all pages that
> are writeable are also marked as not executable. At least, it means
> this is how the system by default operates, until some process asks
> for something that has both write and execute permission.
>
> On some architectures W^X is easy, since the native architecture has a
> execute-permitted bit per page (sparc, sparc64, alpha, hppa, m88k).
> On other architectures, it is difficult and various hacks have to be
> done to make it work (i386, powerpc).

It's not difficult at all on x86, but having non-overlapping Segments
for Code and Data/Stack would limit the virtual address space. This
doesn't matter if your machine is equipped with 2 GB (RAM+Pagefile) or
less, because all pages of those 2 GB can completely be mapped to linear
addresses in either the code or data/stack segment. As soon as there's
more memory available, you have to decide how large the code and
data/stack segment should be.
Adressing more than 4 GB on x86 is an ugly hack anyways -PSE as well as
PAE.

--
* Origin: (2:2480/8057.2)

[ reply ]
Re: Buffer overflow prevention Aug 14 2003 09:43PM
Theo de Raadt (deraadt cvs openbsd org) (1 replies)
Re: Buffer overflow prevention Aug 14 2003 10:19PM
Gerhard Strangar (gerhard brue net)
Re: Buffer overflow prevention Aug 14 2003 08:09PM
Matt D. Harris (vesper depraved org)
Re: Buffer overflow prevention Aug 14 2003 07:17PM
Timo Sirainen (tss iki fi) (1 replies)
Re: Buffer overflow prevention Aug 14 2003 08:15PM
Jedi/Sector One (j pureftpd org) (1 replies)
Re: Buffer overflow prevention Aug 15 2003 09:54AM
Peter Busser (peter trusteddebian org)
Re: Buffer overflow prevention Aug 14 2003 06:47PM
Jedi/Sector One (j pureftpd org) (2 replies)
Re: Buffer overflow prevention Aug 15 2003 09:41AM
Peter Busser (peter trusteddebian org) (2 replies)
Re: Buffer overflow prevention Aug 16 2003 01:36AM
Mark Tinberg (mtinberg securepipe com) (2 replies)
Re: Buffer overflow prevention Aug 18 2003 08:43PM
Crispin Cowan (crispin immunix com)
Re: Buffer overflow prevention Aug 18 2003 08:41PM
Peter Busser (peter trusteddebian org)
Re: Buffer overflow prevention Aug 15 2003 05:55PM
stealth (stealth segfault net)
Re: Buffer overflow prevention Aug 14 2003 08:24PM
Miod Vallat (miod online fr)
Re: Buffer overflow prevention Aug 14 2003 06:27PM
Thomas Sjögren (thomas northernsecurity net)
Re: [Full-Disclosure] Re: Buffer overflow prevention Aug 14 2003 04:51PM
KF (dotslash snosoft com)


 

Privacy Statement
Copyright 2010, SecurityFocus