On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 9:40 PM, John Baldwin j...@freebsd.org wrote:
On Friday, September 07, 2012 2:41:20 pm Konstantin Belousov wrote:
I think these would be rare? There's no good reason for anything to write
to
a shared library that I can think of. install(1) does an atomic rename to
On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 3:00 PM, Konstantin Belousov kostik...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Sep 04, 2012 at 02:49:07PM +0200, Svatopluk Kraus wrote:
On Mon, Sep 3, 2012 at 2:46 PM, Konstantin Belousov kostik...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Mon, Sep 03, 2012 at 12:35:08PM +0200, Svatopluk Kraus wrote:
On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 6:00 PM, John Baldwin j...@freebsd.org wrote:
On Tuesday, September 04, 2012 9:00:39 am Konstantin Belousov wrote:
On Tue, Sep 04, 2012 at 02:49:07PM +0200, Svatopluk Kraus wrote:
On Mon, Sep 3, 2012 at 2:46 PM, Konstantin Belousov kostik...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Mon,
On Fri, Sep 07, 2012 at 05:12:37PM +0200, Svatopluk Kraus wrote:
On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 6:00 PM, John Baldwin j...@freebsd.org wrote:
On Tuesday, September 04, 2012 9:00:39 am Konstantin Belousov wrote:
On Tue, Sep 04, 2012 at 02:49:07PM +0200, Svatopluk Kraus wrote:
On Mon, Sep 3, 2012 at
On Friday, September 07, 2012 12:02:08 pm Konstantin Belousov wrote:
On Fri, Sep 07, 2012 at 05:12:37PM +0200, Svatopluk Kraus wrote:
On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 6:00 PM, John Baldwin j...@freebsd.org wrote:
On Tuesday, September 04, 2012 9:00:39 am Konstantin Belousov wrote:
2. I do not see
On Fri, Sep 07, 2012 at 12:21:37PM -0400, John Baldwin wrote:
On Friday, September 07, 2012 12:02:08 pm Konstantin Belousov wrote:
On Fri, Sep 07, 2012 at 05:12:37PM +0200, Svatopluk Kraus wrote:
On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 6:00 PM, John Baldwin j...@freebsd.org wrote:
On Tuesday, September
On Friday, September 07, 2012 12:42:18 pm Konstantin Belousov wrote:
On Fri, Sep 07, 2012 at 12:21:37PM -0400, John Baldwin wrote:
On Friday, September 07, 2012 12:02:08 pm Konstantin Belousov wrote:
On Fri, Sep 07, 2012 at 05:12:37PM +0200, Svatopluk Kraus wrote:
On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at
On Fri, Sep 07, 2012 at 02:05:28PM -0400, John Baldwin wrote:
On Friday, September 07, 2012 12:42:18 pm Konstantin Belousov wrote:
On Fri, Sep 07, 2012 at 12:21:37PM -0400, John Baldwin wrote:
On Friday, September 07, 2012 12:02:08 pm Konstantin Belousov wrote:
On Fri, Sep 07, 2012 at
On Fri, 2012-09-07 at 21:41 +0300, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
After a second thought, I do not like your proposal as well. +x is set for
shebang scripts, and allowing PROT_EXEC to set VV_TEXT for them means
that such scripts are subject for write denial.
You say that like it's a bad thing. I
On Fri, Sep 07, 2012 at 12:48:19PM -0600, Ian Lepore wrote:
On Fri, 2012-09-07 at 21:41 +0300, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
After a second thought, I do not like your proposal as well. +x is set for
shebang scripts, and allowing PROT_EXEC to set VV_TEXT for them means
that such scripts are
On Fri, 2012-09-07 at 21:53 +0300, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
On Fri, Sep 07, 2012 at 12:48:19PM -0600, Ian Lepore wrote:
On Fri, 2012-09-07 at 21:41 +0300, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
After a second thought, I do not like your proposal as well. +x is set for
shebang scripts, and allowing
On Friday, September 07, 2012 2:41:20 pm Konstantin Belousov wrote:
I think these would be rare? There's no good reason for anything to write
to
a shared library that I can think of. install(1) does an atomic rename to
swap
in the new libraries already.
After a second thought, I
On Mon, Sep 3, 2012 at 2:46 PM, Konstantin Belousov kostik...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Sep 03, 2012 at 12:35:08PM +0200, Svatopluk Kraus wrote:
Hi,
I found out that while the running excecutables and a dynamic linker
are protected against writing (ETXTBSY), the loaded shared libraries
are
On Tue, Sep 04, 2012 at 02:49:07PM +0200, Svatopluk Kraus wrote:
On Mon, Sep 3, 2012 at 2:46 PM, Konstantin Belousov kostik...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Mon, Sep 03, 2012 at 12:35:08PM +0200, Svatopluk Kraus wrote:
Hi,
I found out that while the running excecutables and a dynamic linker
On Tuesday, September 04, 2012 9:00:39 am Konstantin Belousov wrote:
On Tue, Sep 04, 2012 at 02:49:07PM +0200, Svatopluk Kraus wrote:
On Mon, Sep 3, 2012 at 2:46 PM, Konstantin Belousov kostik...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Mon, Sep 03, 2012 at 12:35:08PM +0200, Svatopluk Kraus wrote:
Hi,
Hi,
I found out that while the running excecutables and a dynamic linker
are protected against writing (ETXTBSY), the loaded shared libraries
are not protected. The libraries are mapped by mmap() in dynamic
linker (rtld) and there is no way how to set VV_TEXT flag on the
libraries vnodes in
on 03/09/2012 13:35 Svatopluk Kraus said the following:
After some investigation, it looks that VV_TEXT once set on a vnode
remains set until last reference on the vnode is left.
There was an idea to turn VV_TEXT flag into a v_text counter.
Maybe something like that would be useful indeed?
--
On Mon, Sep 03, 2012 at 12:35:08PM +0200, Svatopluk Kraus wrote:
Hi,
I found out that while the running excecutables and a dynamic linker
are protected against writing (ETXTBSY), the loaded shared libraries
are not protected. The libraries are mapped by mmap() in dynamic
linker (rtld) and
18 matches
Mail list logo
