|
Home > Archive > Unix questions > October 2005 > Meaning of --x permission on a [non-directory] file
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Meaning of --x permission on a [non-directory] file
|
|
| Matthew Sharp 2005-10-24, 3:46 pm |
| If there is a file (a compiled c program) for which I have --x permission, and I run it, what happens? Does the code get loaded into memory that I own, and if so, can it be saved to a file (hence getting a copy of the file without having had read permiss
ion)? or is there an implied SUID (which would be dangerous)? or something else happens which I am missing? Something about running code you can't read seems not possible to me.
| |
| Casper H.S. Dik 2005-10-24, 3:46 pm |
| Matthew Sharp <fake@nowhere.com> writes:
>If there is a file (a compiled c program) for which I have --x
>permission, and I run it, what happens? Does the code get loaded into
>memory that I own, and if so, can it be saved to a file (hence getting
>a copy of the file without having had read permission)? or is there an
>implied SUID (which would be dangerous)? or something else happens
>which I am missing? Something about running code you can't read seems
>not possible to me.
Typically, you cannot use a debugger or other tools on the files;
however, stuff like LD_LIBRARY_PATH and LD_PRELOAD generally work
on such executables and as such you will be able to instrument
the binary to the point that you know what it does.
Casper
--
Expressed in this posting are my opinions. They are in no way related
to opinions held by my employer, Sun Microsystems.
Statements on Sun products included here are not gospel and may
be fiction rather than truth.
|
|
|
|
|