News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:I got accidental code execution via glibc? by alexgartrell on Friday February 25, 2011 @08:24PM (#2264527)
I'm not usually a meta poster (famous last words), but I would love to see more of this (hardcore systems stuff) on hackers news.

As an aside, anyone know other good sites for this kind of stuff?

Re:I got accidental code execution via glibc? by lwat on Friday February 25, 2011 @08:31PM (#2264538)
Re:I got accidental code execution via glibc? by njn on Saturday February 26, 2011 @02:05AM (#2265070)
Re:I got accidental code execution via glibc? by kaizoku_ on Saturday February 26, 2011 @01:00AM (#2264993)
This guy doesn't really seem to understand the bug he's trying to explain or actually what happened in his "accident".
Re:I got accidental code execution via glibc? by nl on Saturday February 26, 2011 @02:11AM (#2265078)
I think he understands it all too well (and missed explaining a lot of things that a casual reader really needs to know)

The code execution is not the point of the story.

Re:I got accidental code execution via glibc? by kaizoku_ on Saturday February 26, 2011 @03:13AM (#2265139)
The title makes me think that the code execution is the point of the story and he doesn't seem to understand how that happens in fnmatch().
Re:I got accidental code execution via glibc? by pmjordan on Saturday February 26, 2011 @07:47AM (#2265418)
He's established that the stack pointer rolls over due to integer overflow. He hasn't established exactly which part of the input data gets copied over the return pointer, but you're only really interested in that if you're trying to exploit the weakness. Establishing that the stack pointer does overflow is sufficient for the purposes of fixing the bug.