From owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Sep 18 15:52:05 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44A941065679 for ; Fri, 18 Sep 2009 15:52:05 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from leccine@gmail.com) Received: from mail-fx0-f210.google.com (mail-fx0-f210.google.com [209.85.220.210]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB8F88FC12 for ; Fri, 18 Sep 2009 15:52:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: by fxm6 with SMTP id 6so771781fxm.43 for ; Fri, 18 Sep 2009 08:52:03 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=YyJcdA5zjNrLdmCZp03NoU/ql/AsUX+U12iaSG+uhPE=; b=wAaLGi992H259kPOLcJBRlqjVHc4gQpAHYkW00yCg5clHgrw34qPaHfcnk0U2qNfFF NBmVvntCQ/RqRQWV2f+HcoLV0u8jc2Dw14J98r+0ADZdYsnNMal2trGzGiQYiRyqaCsc Ivhu2qQYExq2oQLsOnr9Hr3JKJvs5EHEBUDjI= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; b=V4uxR3+1DdZAwKCJaEiqOsJv/Mci/qQkoO6v2BTV9ai7GsJsNzmt3c0PU8H8UCxqa5 1OJ1RR1D8vfrXDemCHxSfNe8C2wdGLsvyP8o0D1MGSAL+0bSLGPZS4CzHolzNJaUzle5 X56nJ2N8BUrqGT3YW4HgTXu+Zct1g12Dsa7kc= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.204.8.13 with SMTP id f13mr1634946bkf.150.1253289123313; Fri, 18 Sep 2009 08:52:03 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20090919.001313.110616099.hdk_2@yahoo.co.jp> References: <4AAF4A64.3080906@thedarkside.nl> <20090919.001313.110616099.hdk_2@yahoo.co.jp> Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2009 16:52:03 +0100 Message-ID: From: =?ISO-8859-1?B?SXN0duFu?= To: Hideki EIRAKU Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Cc: freebsd-security@freebsd.org, pieter@thedarkside.nl Subject: Re: Protecting against kernel NULL-pointer derefs X-BeenThere: freebsd-security@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Security issues \[members-only posting\]" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2009 15:52:05 -0000 the question is how much percent of the user are using wine and dosbox which are going to break with this setting, i guess 10% or less. So those guys could use _NO_VM_MIN kernel or something while the rest of the world would fly high with secured kernel. to quote a security friend: the freebsd was the last target platform for this bugclass :)) regards, Istvan On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 4:13 PM, Hideki EIRAKU wrote: > From: Pieter de Boer > Subject: Protecting against kernel NULL-pointer derefs > Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2009 10:03:48 +0200 > > > - Are there unwanted side-effects of raising VM_MIN_ADDRESS? > > Mapping at address 0x0 is needed by some softwares using vm86 mode. > For example, emulators/doscmd uses vm86 mode to emulate an old DOS > environment. In this case, the address 0x0 - 0x3ff is used for an > interrupt vector of emulated DOS world. If VM_MIN_ADDRESS is not zero, > doscmd doesn't work. vm86 mode is in 32bit i386 architecture only, not > in amd64 or other architectures. > > -- > Hideki EIRAKU > -------------------------------------- > Thanks 10 years! Yahoo! Shopping and Yahoo! Auctions > http://pr.mail.yahoo.co.jp/ec10years/ > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-security@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-security > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-security-unsubscribe@freebsd.org > " > -- the sun shines for all