On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 02:01:18PM +0100, Alexandre Julliard wrote:
Marcus Meissner meissner@suse.de writes:
Hi,
regression from my previous patch, which forced EXEC permissions on some mappings, which in turn gets EPERM when the filesystem is "noexec" mounted.
I don't think that's a good idea. If the filesystem is no exec we should report it and fail.
The issue is that it worked before my last patch and still works.
Or should we take care of not executing stuff from "noexec" filesystems as kind of policy rule?
Ciao, Marcus