Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2020 16:51:25 +0000
From: Mark Brown <>
To: Dave Martin <>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <>,
	Topi Miettinen <>,
	Mark Rutland <>,
	Salvatore Mesoraca <>,,
	Kees Cook <>,,
	Will Deacon <>,
	"" <>,
	Jeremy Linton <>,,,
	"" <>
Subject: Re: BTI interaction between seccomp filters in systemd and glibc
 mprotect calls, causing service failures

On Mon, Oct 26, 2020 at 03:56:35PM +0000, Dave Martin wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 26, 2020 at 02:52:46PM +0000, Catalin Marinas via Libc-alpha wrote:

> > Now, if the dynamic loader silently ignores the mprotect() failure on
> > the main executable, is there much value in exposing a flag in the aux
> > vectors? It saves a few (one?) mprotect() calls but I don't think it
> > matters much. Anyway, I don't mind the flag.

> I don't see a problem with the aforementioned patch [2] to pre-set BTI
> on the pages of the main binary.

Me either FWIW.

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.