Re: Executable stacks

[Marco Gerards]

Petteri Räty <address@hidden> writes:

> I am not an expert in this area. Our tools just automatically warn you
> about executable stacks so I reported it here.

Sure :)

> "Some operating systems and GNU/Linux distributions don't have an
> executable stack for security reasons. Sometimes it does not have an
> executable stack by default, but the executable stack can be enabled
> again by tagging the binary."
>
> Better wording would be that some distributions don't allow executable
> stacks for security reasons and I did this modification to the wiki.

I noticed that, we were editing the same page simultaneously.  I hope
everything went right.

> "Another solution is enabling the executable stack again by calling some
> function."
>
> This is really vague. I think this should be dropped unless you can
> specify the name of the function but I leave the decision to you. I also
> had trouble understanding some of the stuff on the page but then again I
> am not an expert in these issues.

I changed the wording a bit.  I hope it is clearer now.  English is
not my native language and suggestions for improvements are more than
welcome. :-)

Thanks,
Marco