A hole in PaX
Posted Mar 18, 2005 21:05 UTC (Fri) by huaz
In reply to: A hole in PaX
Parent article: A hole in PaX
> 3. for dang: you can't judge a person's maturity without knowing all the
> reasons for his decision, right? because it looks like you haven't
> bothered to read the advisory and therefore missed the "and other
> reasons" part.
I thought I would find what those "other reasons" are, but there aren't. It seems the advisory confirms that this bug WAS the reason that the author decided to abandon it.
Does it mean that the author realized the PaX design was fundamentally flawed in the current kernel, anyway?
to post comments)