> On Sep 14, 2020, at 6:09 PM, Segher Boessenkool <seg...@kernel.crashing.org> 
> wrote:
> 
> On Fri, Sep 11, 2020 at 05:41:47PM -0500, Qing Zhao wrote:
>>> On Sep 11, 2020, at 4:51 PM, Segher Boessenkool 
>>> <seg...@kernel.crashing.org> wrote:
>>> It is definitely *not* effective if there are gadgets that set rax to
>>> a value the attacker wants and then do a syscall.
>> 
>> You mean the following gadget:
>> 
>> 
>> Gadget 1:
>> 
>> mov  rax,  value
>> syscall
>> ret
> 
> No, just
> 
> mov rax,59
> syscall
> 
> (no ret necessary!)

But for ROP, a typical gadget should be ended with a “ret” (or indirect 
branch), right?

Qing
> 
> I.e. just anything that already does an execve.
> 
> 
> Segher

Reply via email to