<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Executable Stacks in Lenny</title>
	<atom:link href="http://etbe.coker.com.au/2008/08/11/executable-stacks-lenny/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://etbe.coker.com.au/2008/08/11/executable-stacks-lenny/</link>
	<description>Linux, politics, and other interesting things</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 01:09:24 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: etbe</title>
		<link>http://etbe.coker.com.au/2008/08/11/executable-stacks-lenny/comment-page-1/#comment-15286</link>
		<dc:creator>etbe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 11 Aug 2008 22:51:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://etbe.coker.com.au/?p=697#comment-15286</guid>
		<description>Diego: Hopefully the Gentoo patches will get accepted upstream soon.  Getting these things fixed in Debian is a pain.  That&#039;s a nice document about the issues!

Matthew: It could have been designed such that shared objects which needed an executable stack required a special label - this is what was done for PaX/GrSecurity.  But they decided that old objects would default to getting an executable stack.  Reversing that decision on the default in the compiler seems like a bad idea.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Diego: Hopefully the Gentoo patches will get accepted upstream soon.  Getting these things fixed in Debian is a pain.  That&#8217;s a nice document about the issues!</p>
<p>Matthew: It could have been designed such that shared objects which needed an executable stack required a special label &#8211; this is what was done for PaX/GrSecurity.  But they decided that old objects would default to getting an executable stack.  Reversing that decision on the default in the compiler seems like a bad idea.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Matthew W. S. Bell</title>
		<link>http://etbe.coker.com.au/2008/08/11/executable-stacks-lenny/comment-page-1/#comment-15275</link>
		<dc:creator>Matthew W. S. Bell</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 11 Aug 2008 11:31:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://etbe.coker.com.au/?p=697#comment-15275</guid>
		<description>Might it be an idea to try and get the default asm options changed?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Might it be an idea to try and get the default asm options changed?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Diego "Flameeyes" Pettenò</title>
		<link>http://etbe.coker.com.au/2008/08/11/executable-stacks-lenny/comment-page-1/#comment-15270</link>
		<dc:creator>Diego "Flameeyes" Pettenò</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 11 Aug 2008 09:21:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://etbe.coker.com.au/?p=697#comment-15270</guid>
		<description>You might want to take a look about Gentoo&#039;s equivalent packages. We also run similar tests (textrels and execstacks) and we have lots of fixes (thanks to the fact we build everything we can patch them up quickly ;)). We actually have a fixing guide on http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/hardened/gnu-stack.xml too.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You might want to take a look about Gentoo&#8217;s equivalent packages. We also run similar tests (textrels and execstacks) and we have lots of fixes (thanks to the fact we build everything we can patch them up quickly ;)). We actually have a fixing guide on <a href="http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/hardened/gnu-stack.xml" rel="nofollow">http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/hardened/gnu-stack.xml</a> too.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

