In other words, no :)

Here's self-exploiting code to discover its own return address offset
and exploit itself.  It'll lend some insight into how this stuff works.

Just a toy.

Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> On Thu, 2005-01-27 at 14:19 -0500, linux-os wrote:
> 
>>Gentlemen,
>>
>>Isn't the return address on the stack an offset in the
>>code (.text) segment?
>>
>>How would a random stack-pointer value help? I think you would
>>need to start a program at a random offset, not the stack!
>>No stack-smasher that worked would care about the value of
>>the stack-pointer.
> 
> 
> the simple stack exploit works by overflowing a buffer ON THE STACK with
> a "dirty payload and then also overwriting the return address to point
> back into that buffer.
> 
> (all the security guys on this list will now cringe about this over
> simplification; yes reality is more complex but lets keep the
> explenation simple for Richard) 
> 
> pointing back into that buffer needs the address of that buffer. That
> buffer is on the stack, which is now randomized.
> 
> 
> 

-- 
All content of all messages exchanged herein are left in the
Public Domain, unless otherwise explicitly stated.