Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 10:16:26 +0100 From: Oleg Cherkasov <Oleg.Cherkasov@mail.com> To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Subject: Re: philosophical question... Message-ID: <01120310162607.10748@vesna> In-Reply-To: <200112011658.fB1Gwep07621@cwsys.cwsent.com> References: <200112011658.fB1Gwep07621@cwsys.cwsent.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Saturday 01 December 2001 17:57, Cy Schubert - ITSD Open Systems Group wrote: > In message <200112011642.JAA09819@lariat.org>, Brett Glass writes: > > > Would it inconvenience debugging that malloc(3) becomes non > > > deterministic in its layout ? > > > > > > Would the increased uncertainty on program run-time be > > > good or bad ? > > > > It could make reproduction of problems more difficult. So, if > > it goes in, I'd like a switch to turn it off.... Maybe a > > sysctl. > > > > But there's a more serious philosophical issue here. Isn't > > shuffling the heap to avoid attacks really a form of > > "security via obscurity?" > > Defence through depth. Every little bit helps. I think we should do > this. > > I suppose we could have a malloc.conf bit to turn this feature off (on > by default). Think a new key 'malloc.random' for sysctl could be more useful, protected with 'kern.securelevel' > 1. Oleg To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?01120310162607.10748>