Re: Bytecode: Safe or not? / luac manual

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

• Subject: Re: Bytecode: Safe or not? / luac manual
• From: Peter Cawley <lua@...>
• Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2011 20:13:20 +0000

---

On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 8:09 PM, Sean Conner <sean@conman.org> wrote:
> Even if you carefully verify all the opcodes, you are still
> vulnerable to a "return-to-libc" style attack.
And what exactly is the Lua equivalent to return-to-libc?

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Bytecode: Safe or not? / luac manual, Sean Conner

• References:
  • Re: Bytecode: Safe or not? / luac manual, Stefan Reich
  • Re: Bytecode: Safe or not? / luac manual, Rob Kendrick
  • Re: Bytecode: Safe or not? / luac manual, Stefan Reich
  • Re: Bytecode: Safe or not? / luac manual, Sean Conner

• Prev by Date: Re: Bytecode: Safe or not? / luac manual
• Next by Date: Re: Bytecode: Safe or not? / luac manual
• Previous by thread: Re: Bytecode: Safe or not? / luac manual
• Next by thread: Re: Bytecode: Safe or not? / luac manual
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread