Vulnerability Development mailing list archives

Re: No-Exec Stack Smashing 101

From: emsi () IT PL (Mariusz Woloszyn)
Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2000 10:26:57 +0200


On Thu, 20 Apr 2000, Granquist, Lamont wrote:

And can anyone explain why I'm not getting coredumps as a normal user
under RH6.2?  (coredumpsize is unlimited, foo is not suid)

Perhaps you're trying to exploit suid binary. Remove the setuid bit and it
will dump core.

--
Mariusz Wo³oszyn
Internet Security Specialist, Internet Partners, GTS Poland

Current thread:

No-Exec Stack Smashing 101 Granquist, Lamont (Apr 19)
- Re: No-Exec Stack Smashing 101 Crispin Cowan (Apr 19)
  - Re: No-Exec Stack Smashing 101 M.C.Mar (Apr 20)
    - Re: No-Exec Stack Smashing 101 M.C.Mar (Apr 20)
    - Re: No-Exec Stack Smashing 101 Granquist, Lamont (Apr 20)
    - Re: No-Exec Stack Smashing 101 M.C.Mar (Apr 20)
    - Re: No-Exec Stack Smashing 101 Granquist, Lamont (Apr 20)
    - Re: No-Exec Stack Smashing 101 Mariusz Woloszyn (Apr 21)
    - Securax Security Advisory: Windows98 contains a serious buffer overflow with long filenameextensions. Zoa_Chien (Apr 21)
    - Re: Securax Security Advisory: Windows98 contains a serious buffer overflow with long filenameextensions. Bob Fiero (Apr 21)
    - Re: Securax Security Advisory: Windows98 contains a serious buffer overflow with long filenameextensions. Ron DuFresne (Apr 21)
    - Re: Securax Security Advisory: Windows98 contains a serious buffer overflow with long filenameextensions. Zoa_Chien (Apr 21)
    - Re: Securax Security Advisory: Windows98 contains a seriousbuffer overflow with long filenameextensions. Markus Kern (Apr 22)
    - Re: Securax Security Advisory: Windows98 contains a seriousbuffer overflow with long filenameextensions. Zoa_Chien (Apr 23)
    - koules again Kotz (Apr 21)
    - Re: koules again Ron DuFresne (Apr 21)
    - Re: No-Exec Stack Smashing 101 Granquist, Lamont (Apr 25)
    - Re: No-Exec Stack Smashing 101 M.C.Mar (Apr 26)

(Thread continues...)