A return-oriented programming defense from OpenBSD
A return-oriented programming defense from OpenBSD
Posted Aug 31, 2017 15:26 UTC (Thu) by mathstuf (subscriber, #69389)In reply to: A return-oriented programming defense from OpenBSD by droundy
Parent article: A return-oriented programming defense from OpenBSD
Wouldn't this break the ABI and `dlsym` looking up and using that function? Or would this approach only be viable for static functions or functions going into executables?
Posted Aug 31, 2017 19:15 UTC (Thu)
by nix (subscriber, #2304)
[Link]
A return-oriented programming defense from OpenBSD
It would only be viable for static functions whose addresses are not leaked (whether dlsym() counts as such a leak is questionable). Simply taking the function's address is probably enough to invalidate it, particularly given the existence of things like register_printf_function(), or, heck, atexit().