> On Aug 26, 2016, at 9:20 AM, Pedro Giffuni <p...@freebsd.org> wrote: > > > > On 08/26/16 10:08, Warner Losh wrote: >> On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 9:06 AM, Pedro Giffuni <p...@freebsd.org> wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 08/26/16 10:01, Warner Losh wrote: >>>> >>>> On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 8:36 AM, Ed Maste <ema...@freebsd.org> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On 26 August 2016 at 10:18, Warner Losh <i...@bsdimp.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> So what's the summary of why we'd want to do that? What benefit does it >>>>>> bring? >>>>>> Sure, other folks do it, but why? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> It's a relatively low cost technique to mitigate certain >>>>> vulnerabilities. rtld needs to write to some sections during load but >>>>> they don't need to be writeable after starting the program. relro >>>>> reorders the output sections so that they are grouped together, and >>>>> rtld remaps them read-only on start. This is often called "partial >>>>> relro." I don't know of any real downside to enabling it, other than >>>>> it could possibly break some strangely built third party software. >>>>> It's been enabled on other platforms for quite some time though and I >>>>> doubt we'd run into new issues. >>>>> >>>>> It doesn't bring a huge benefit by itself though; the PLT is still >>>>> writeable. Adding "-z now" to the linker invocation produces "full >>>>> relro" which makes the PLT read-only too. It has a negative impact on >>>>> process start-up time though. >>>> >>>> >>>> Sounds like this has implications for all the RTLD on all our >>>> architectures. Has this been tested across all of them? >>>> >>> >>> It affects anything ELF yes, but AFAICT the change is platform independent. >> >> That's a different answer than 'it's been tested on all platforms and >> it's fine.' >> > > It's the best answer I have.
I’d politely suggest that we solicit help to get a better answer. > I will test running buildworld on i386. If you can kindly test on other > platforms, it would be very welcome. I might be able to do armv6, but I have no time to do mips. The mailing lists for them might get results faster since I’m kinda swamped. And since the powerpc guys are around and active, it wouldn’t hurt to send it there too. > In any case I will not commit anything unless there is complete > consensus, which is why I asked in this list in the first place :). Yea. This should be easy enough to test to make sure there’s no weird gotchas. Warner
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
