[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: kernel aslr: someone interested?
In article <smu37e1h7bo.fsf%linuxpal.mit.edu@localhost>,
Greg Troxel <gdt%lexort.com@localhost> wrote:
>Maxime Villard <max%m00nbsd.net@localhost> writes:
>> I would also add - even if it is not a relevant argument - that most
>> "commonly-used" operating systems do have kernel aslr: Windows, Mac, Linux,
>There's another point, which various people may also consider invalid :-)
>In the US, there's a federal computer security standard NIST 800-53, and
>essentially a subset of that NIST 800-171, and more or less all federal
>contractors handling non-public information have to implement it. There
>are a lot of security controls, and exploit mitigation is one of them.
>I am not claiming that kernel ASLR is a requirement. But, I would hate
>to see people in these environments be told not to use NetBSD because it
>lacks some security controls compared to alternatives.
I think that nobody disputes that ASLR significantly raises the barrier
to entry (amount of work) that attackers need to perform in most cases.
Main Index |
Thread Index |