Re: Executable /lib/ld-linux.so breaks noexec

2003-05-20 Thread Ben Collins
> That behavior always struck me as fairly evil -- it's never fun when one > single bit flip can take down a system, and I'd like to see the number > of bits that can do so be as small as possible. Now that you point out > the actual code I wish we could do away with that check. Does it really > bu

Re: Executable /lib/ld-linux.so breaks noexec

2003-05-20 Thread Joey Hess
Colin Watson wrote: > On Tue, May 20, 2003 at 05:15:22PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote: > > Martin Pitt wrote: > > >Is there any particular reason to have /lib/ld-linux.so.* exxecutable? > > >If it is used only as a proper library, it need not be executable. > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/priv$ sudo c

Re: Executable /lib/ld-linux.so breaks noexec

2003-05-20 Thread Russell Coker
On Wed, 21 May 2003 01:45, Martin Pitt wrote: > Is there any particular reason to have /lib/ld-linux.so.* exxecutable? > If it is used only as a proper library, it need not be executable. > > The problem is that this breaks the "noexec" mount option. If /foo is > mounted noexec, then one cannot do

Re: Executable /lib/ld-linux.so breaks noexec

2003-05-20 Thread Colin Watson
On Tue, May 20, 2003 at 05:15:22PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote: > Martin Pitt wrote: > >Is there any particular reason to have /lib/ld-linux.so.* exxecutable? > >If it is used only as a proper library, it need not be executable. > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/priv$ sudo chmod a-x /lib/ld-linux.so.2 > Pa

Re: Executable /lib/ld-linux.so breaks noexec

2003-05-20 Thread Emile van Bergen
Hi, On Tue, May 20, 2003 at 05:45:21PM +0200, Martin Pitt wrote: > Hi! > > Is there any particular reason to have /lib/ld-linux.so.* exxecutable? > If it is used only as a proper library, it need not be executable. > > The problem is that this breaks the "noexec" mount option. If /foo is > moun

Re: Executable /lib/ld-linux.so breaks noexec

2003-05-20 Thread Matthew Garrett
Martin Pitt wrote: >Is there any particular reason to have /lib/ld-linux.so.* exxecutable? >If it is used only as a proper library, it need not be executable. [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/priv$ sudo chmod a-x /lib/ld-linux.so.2 Password: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/priv$ ls bash: /bin/ls: Permission denied [EMAIL

Re: Executable /lib/ld-linux.so breaks noexec

2003-05-20 Thread Matt Zimmerman
On Tue, May 20, 2003 at 05:45:21PM +0200, Martin Pitt wrote: > Is there any particular reason to have /lib/ld-linux.so.* exxecutable? > If it is used only as a proper library, it need not be executable. > > The problem is that this breaks the "noexec" mount option. If /foo is > mounted noexec, th

Executable /lib/ld-linux.so breaks noexec

2003-05-20 Thread Martin Pitt
Hi! Is there any particular reason to have /lib/ld-linux.so.* exxecutable? If it is used only as a proper library, it need not be executable. The problem is that this breaks the "noexec" mount option. If /foo is mounted noexec, then one cannot do /foo/myprog, but /lib/ld-linux.so.1 /foo/myprog