tracexec uses BPF to some extent, but probably not in the way you guessed. it uses ptrace to do most of the work and use seccomp-bpf to speed it up. Using eBPF to do the syscall filtering requires root, so that's a reason for me to choose ptrace. And credits to the strace developers: https://pchaigno.github.io/strace/2019/10/02/introducing-str...

Yes, it's a very high priority todo for me: https://github.com/kxxt/tracexec/issues/3. I already reserved space for it(The empty line under title in the TUI). It requires some work because for now the environment panel is just a paragraph of text wrapped in a scrollview.

ChatGPT can be a helpful reviewer but it can also give you miss leading suggestions. But it seems that it doesn't know how to properly write a patch.

Recently I participated in Geekgame 2nd, which is a pretty good CTF competition for CTF newbies like me.

One problem in that competition is to submit a safe rust program that will segfault. The problem forces you to begin your rust code by #![forbid(unsafe_code)], which can’t be worked around by #![allow(unsafe_code)].

Of course, there is an attribute `allow_internal_unsafe` which allows you to use unsafe code inside a macro.

But after this PR(https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/57467) was merged, you can no longer use this attribute when unsafe code is forbidden.

So how can you cause a segfault in safe rust under the assumption that you can not bypass #![forbid(unsafe_code)].

...

Read the complete blog by clicking the link in the title.