Anyone protecting the stack?
Sander Vesik
sander at haldjas.folklore.ee
Tue Sep 23 18:23:39 PDT 2003
Kip Macy <kmacy at xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hiten -
> If it complicates pmap for i386 as Dave says, then I have to agree that it
> is an unneccessary distraction that should be postponed. However, if it
> didn't please explain to me why securelevel isn't an adequate solution?
> Granted it won't protect desktops, but an 80% solution is better than a 0%
> solution.
>
If there is a need to treat it as a limited option, it could even be a
kernel compile option - those who need or want the extra protection could
still use it - but I don't personaly think the option is quite drastic
enough to require such.
Its not a different ABI (like separate control stack) or anything.
> -Kip
>
--
Sander
+++ Out of cheese error +++
More information about the Kernel
mailing list