zlacker

[parent] [thread] 5 comments
1. pizlon+(OP)[view] [source] 2023-10-27 22:07:35
A+

This is awesome.

Also, it’s rarely used in my experience. I wonder what kind of code would even notice?

replies(2): >>action+S4 >>saagar+NW
◧
2. action+S4[view] [source] 2023-10-27 22:40:20
>>pizlon+(OP)
Exploits, I guess is the concern.
◧
3. saagar+NW[view] [source] 2023-10-28 08:56:11
>>pizlon+(OP)
Code that uses syscalls that aren’t in libc but doesn’t want to have to drop to inline assembly?
replies(1): >>pizlon+3v1
◧◩
4. pizlon+3v1[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-10-28 15:09:42
>>saagar+NW
Right, so exploits.
replies(1): >>saagar+gj2
◧◩◪
5. saagar+gj2[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-10-28 21:24:16
>>pizlon+3v1
Exploits are more than happy to drop to inline assembly.
replies(1): >>pizlon+Jj2
◧◩◪◨
6. pizlon+Jj2[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-10-28 21:27:32
>>saagar+gj2
Theo already prevented you from making the syscall by using the trap instruction directly because of in kernel checking that you got to the kernel via the right point in libc.
[go to top]