Talk:Return-to-libc attack

Latest comment: 6 years ago by InternetArchiveBot in topic External links modified

Verify?

edit

the "Security softwares that protect against return-to-libc attacks" Chapter sounds a bit hm.... - better remove it!? 15:10, 3 March 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.235.38.53 (talk)

Also Note, that the editor who is adding this actually also add a big critism chapter on Norton and things on Comodo Products. Please look at his contribs! I suggest to revert nearly everything he has done. 79.235.38.53 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:13, 3 March 2009 (UTC).Reply

ASCII-Armoring

edit

Someone should write the ASCII-Armoring article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 187.191.13.205 (talk) 20:29, 16 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Return-to-libc attack. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:57, 15 December 2017 (UTC)Reply