Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Heap Protection Mechanism

Posted by Hemos on from the protecting-ourselves dept.

An anonymous reader writes "There's an article by Jason Miller on innovation in Unix that talks about OpenBSD's new heap protection mechanism as a major boon for security. Sounds like OpenBSD is going to be the first to support this new security method."

6 of 365 comments (clear)

  1. My solution is slower, but 100% effective by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny
    When my application needs a chunk of memory, it sends a specially crafted HTTPS request to my bank, debits the account, sends a fax to the local computer shop who then sends a tech over to install the DIMMs.

    When the application is finished with the memory, it sends a FAX to the local electronics recycling facility who sends out a tech to remove the DIMMs and melt them down into whatever.

    Using this method of heap memory allocation (I call it "ACAlloc" for "Anonymous Coward Alloc" has been 100% effective and I have NEVER had a heap overflow exploit in any of my code.

    Yes, it's slow, but I am secure.

    ...And I'm running the most up-to-date 80386 Linux 0.97 kernel. TDz.

  2. What's next? by Groo+Wanderer · · Score: 3, Funny

    Ok, we start out with 'protection', then we move to 'a heap' of protection, most assuredly to be followed by 'a whole heap' of protection. I can only see this spiral continuing until Bill Gates himself gets up on stage at CES in an Elvis suit promising 'a hunka- hunka- burnin protection'. *SHUDDER* Time to take a cold shower.

                  -Charlie

  3. Re:Hm... old technique? by Chocolate+Teapot · · Score: 3, Funny
    Guard pages aren't exactly shiny new

    Shhh!! I was waiting until everyone started using them before hitting them with my patent ;)

    --
    Modest doubt is called the beacon of the wise. - William Shakespeare
  4. VBLinux by Frankie70 · · Score: 4, Funny


      For real security, don't use C.


    I am rewriting Linux in Visual Basic 6.0.
    I am going to call the distro VBLinux.

  5. Re:Unnecessary when using languages that solve thi by Clover_Kicker · · Score: 3, Funny

    You're totally right, dude.

    Let me know when you release your Haskell version of Sendmail, and I'll switch over immediately.

  6. Re:Whatever happened to segmentation? by Sloppy · · Score: 5, Funny
    Holy crap, if my 1987 self could hear what I'm saying in 2005... "You senile old bastard! I'll fucking kill you for this!" would probably be his first reaction.

    2005 self would counter with, "Yeah, the pointers will be bigger than they used to be, but you progam in high-level languages now, so you don't ever worry about that. It's the compiler's problem."

    1987 Sloppy would say, "But I'm going go write a compiler!"

    2005 Sloppy would say, "You fuckwit, you never got anywhere on that project. You barely even started it. Too much time fucking around with graphics and genetics."

    1987 Sloppy would say, "But, but, it's not fair! Segmentation is an x86 thing. Everyone knows that in the future, we'll all be using 68k. 68k doesn't do segmentation."

    2005 Sloppy would sigh.

    1987 Sloppy would say, "Oh come on. There's no way people are still using x86 in the 21st century, or even in the 1990s. No fucking way."

    2005 Sloppy would just shrug. There's nothing to do in a situation like this. There's nothing you can say. They'll never believe you.

    --
    As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.