Talk:Buffer overflow
Workgroup category or categories | Computers Workgroup [Editors asked to check categories] |
Article status | Developing article: beyond a stub, but incomplete |
Underlinked article? | Yes |
Basic cleanup done? | Yes |
Checklist last edited by | --Eric M Gearhart 09:54, 12 April 2007 (CDT) |
To learn how to fill out this checklist, please see CZ:The Article Checklist.
Editors please comment on what more this article needs for approval
The CZ community did a great job taking this article from the "embryo" I created and ironing out an encyclopedia-quality article. I'd like to ask our editors for input on what more development this article needs before it is ready for approval Eric M Gearhart
- We still need someone to write about OpenBSD's W^X-bit strategy. --Nick Johnson 13:47, 19 April 2007 (CDT)
Technical explanation not technical
For instance, nothing "marks" stack contents as either program location or data.--Nick Johnson 14:40, 11 April 2007 (CDT)
- Why not correct the article then? --Eric M Gearhart 14:51, 11 April 2007 (CDT)
More for software
I plan on doing some research, and then adding these things under the software section:
- StackGuard and Canary Values as implemented by a compiler
- Check --Nick Johnson 09:08, 12 April 2007 (CDT)
- Memory address randomization
- Check --Nick Johnson 09:08, 12 April 2007 (CDT)
- Separation of privileges
- Can't decide if this belongs on this page. It's a generic security safeguard, not specific to buffer overflows --Nick Johnson 10:01, 12 April 2007 (CDT)
--Nick Johnson 08:36, 12 April 2007 (CDT)
More on Hardware/Software
By the way: OpenBSD does something called W^X (write-exclusive-or-execute). I don't really know how it works, but if anyone does, it should be added here. --Nick Johnson 08:37, 12 April 2007 (CDT)
Article growing nicely
This is why I love working on wikis... I've learned as much as I've contributed to this article. Nice job Nick. --Eric M Gearhart 09:54, 12 April 2007 (CDT)
- The pleasure is mine. Thank you Eric. --Nick Johnson 10:00, 12 April 2007 (CDT)
Document structure changes
I don't think that "Tools Used During Software Development", "By The Operating System", "As Language Semantics or Library Functionality", and "As Compiler Features" should be sub-headings under "Software Debugging Tools". I have changed the structure accordingly. My reasoning: the operating system, language semantics and the library itself are not debugging tools. The compiler may be considered a debugging tool, but this operation of it is not a debugging tool. --Nick Johnson 11:30, 16 April 2007 (CDT)
- Yes the main reason I originally added those sections was just to "drum up ideas" for that section... technical accuracy trumps structure any day. Eric M Gearhart
- Computers Category Check
- General Category Check
- Category Check
- Advanced Articles
- Nonstub Articles
- Internal Articles
- Computers Advanced Articles
- Computers Nonstub Articles
- Computers Internal Articles
- Developed Articles
- Computers Developed Articles
- Developing Articles
- Computers Developing Articles
- Stub Articles
- Computers Stub Articles
- External Articles
- Computers External Articles
- Computers Underlinked Articles
- Underlinked Articles
- Computers Cleanup
- General Cleanup
- Cleanup