Re: noexec-flag does not work in Linux 2.4.10-pre10

[Padraig Brady]

Alexander Viro wrote:

>
>On Fri, 21 Sep 2001, Peter Bornemann wrote:
>
>>This is no problem for me but an inconvenience. If You see all
>>the x-flags You believe in the executability (is that right?), moreover,
>>as on my system executables are displayed in red colour, I feel my eyes
>>are deceived to some extent.
>>
>
>Then you've never used noexec on normal filesystems (after all, _that_
>is the intended use - prohibit execution of binaries from potentially
>unsafe place, and in that case you are interested in all mode bits, so
>you want them to be reported).
>

I wondered what you gain by noexec actually as there is always a way to
execute code you can read. For e.g. if you want to execute a binary from
/mnt/unsafe you can do (RH7.1):  /lib/ld-linux.so.2 /mnt/unsafe/hack.bin ?

>  Try to remount some normal fs noexec
>(_not_ one that contains mount(8), or you'll have really big trouble
>on hands).  Then look at it - exec bits are still there and they
>are still reported.
>
>>But, as umask=111 works, I will switch to that.
>>
>>Thanks a lot!
>>
>>Peter B
>>