On Mon, Apr 04, 2016 at 12:46:57PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: > On 03/31/2016 11:45 PM, Juan Francisco Cantero Hurtado wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 08:44:58AM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote: > > [...] > >> I generally reject the addition of security knobs, and push towards > >> making the security choice mandatory, as early as possible. We are > >> not quite in the position of making this choice. (Maybe a ports > >> developer can list some programs that require WX memory today) > > > > There is an external project for Arch Linux which keeps a list of the > > programs incompatible with PaX's equivalent to W^X. > > > > https://github.com/thestinger/paxd/blob/master/paxd.conf > > > > The programs marked with "m" are incompatible. > > Does the PaX implementation reject alias mappings?
I don't know. In this case I'm just an user. You could ask in their forum. -- Juan Francisco Cantero Hurtado http://juanfra.info
