Displaying 2 results from an estimated 2 matches for "177545".
Did you mean:
137545
2017 Feb 18
2
[RFC] Using Intel MPX to harden SafeStack
...77|823993 |
+--------------+---------+---------+---------+-------+
|456.hmmer|258593|358033|358225|432249 |
+--------------+---------+---------+---------+-------+
|458.sjeng|96593|192929|193121|251545 |
+--------------+---------+---------+---------+-------+
|462.libquantum|32441|127065|127257|177545 |
+--------------+---------+---------+---------+-------+
|464.h264ref|539713|638705|638897|736729 |
+--------------+---------+---------+---------+-------+
|471.omnetpp|403521|527345|527537|597801 |
+--------------+---------+---------+---------+-------+
|473.astar|31169|126225|126417|178105 |...
2017 Feb 08
4
[RFC] Using Intel MPX to harden SafeStack
Hi,
I previously posted about using 32-bit X86 segmentation to harden SafeStack: http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2016-May/100346.html That involves lowering the limits of the DS and ES segments that are used for ordinary data accesses while leaving the limit for SS, the stack segment, set to its maximum value. The safe stacks were clustered above the limits of DS and ES. Thus, by