Re: partial analysis of vulndev-1.c
From: master of chaos - lord of mean (losTrace_at_gmx.de)
Date: 05/14/03
- Previous message: Shafik Yaghmour: "RE: Administrivia: List Announcement"
- In reply to: David R. Piegdon: "partial analysis of vulndev-1.c"
- Next in thread: David Schwartz: "RE: partial analysis of vulndev-1.c"
- Reply: David Schwartz: "RE: partial analysis of vulndev-1.c"
- Reply: andrewg_at_d2.net.au: "Re: partial analysis of vulndev-1.c"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
To: vuln-dev@securityfocus.com Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 01:17:51 +0200
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
actually, during debugging i used a modified version with #define SIZE 10.
this one did not produce a SIGSEGV.
when realising that others were able to produce one (Nexus for example),
i checked the unmodified. it produces a SIGSEGV.
does someone know, why the modified does not produce one?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQE+wX0jWCFHEwXrEHMRAgx0AJ9o2sXADTflZWLOkDwyUn+FueY3EgCdF5Ck
RnHpQsRiuedObaBlLM50xU0=
=MI0H
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
- Previous message: Shafik Yaghmour: "RE: Administrivia: List Announcement"
- In reply to: David R. Piegdon: "partial analysis of vulndev-1.c"
- Next in thread: David Schwartz: "RE: partial analysis of vulndev-1.c"
- Reply: David Schwartz: "RE: partial analysis of vulndev-1.c"
- Reply: andrewg_at_d2.net.au: "Re: partial analysis of vulndev-1.c"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|
