[Full-disclosure] What RedHat doesn't want you to know about ExecShield (without NX)

[h4h]

On 5/14/07, Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu <Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 14 May 2007 10:13:19 EDT, Brad Spengler said:
>
> > Ingo knows about this (I mailed him privately about the problems I saw
> > with Fedora Core 3, which resulted in an updated kernel -- though I
>
> Dude, Fedora Core 3 was like 2 frikking years ago.  I suppose it's OK
> for us to diss the grsecurity patch today because there were bugs in 2.1.5
> ?
> (I have a grsecurity-2.1.5-2.6.11.9-200505121617.patch.gz hanging around
> which dates back to just about the same time as FC3 was released).
>
> Now if you want to discuss the execshield implementation that's currently
> shipping in FC6 or the about-to-escape FC7, we'll be more than happy to
> listen.


Is that really the only thing you could find in spenders post to complain
about, Valdis?  Are the rest of his points therefor moot? lol.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.grok.org.uk/pipermail/full-disclosure/attachments/20070514/294617e7/attachment.html