Re: JIT emulator needs

["H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>]

Albert Cahalan wrote:
> Putting this into the security policy was an error born of
> lazyness to begin with. Abuse of the security mechanism
> was easier than hacking the toolchain, ELF loader, etc.
> 
> Either a binary needs self-modification, or it doesn't. This is
> determined by the author of the code. If you don't trust an
> executable that needs this ability, then you simply can not
> run it in a useful way.

That's fine.  That's a policy decision.  That's what a security policy
*is*.  The owner of the system has decided, by security policy, that
that is not allowed.  Bypassing that is not acceptable.

	-hpa