On 08/27/16 12:45, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
On Sat, Aug 27, 2016 at 11:06:54AM -0500, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
On 08/26/16 20:10, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
...>> I think we should move forward, just want to make sure it doesn???t
break some arch completely before moving ahead. While lld is a g
On Sat, Aug 27, 2016 at 11:06:54AM -0500, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
>
>
> On 08/26/16 20:10, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
> >
> >
> ...>> I think we should move forward, just want to make sure it doesn???t
> >> break some arch completely before moving ahead. While lld is a goal,
> >> the goal is also to have
Quick top post: retrying "portmaster -DKa" after rebooting did not repeat the
panic.
OPTIONS_FILE_SET+=RELRO likely has nothing to do with the unusual panic.
===
Mark Millard
markmi at dsl-only.net
On 2016-Aug-27, at 3:35 AM, Mark Millard wrote:
[I've no solid evidence of what the panic is ti
[I've no solid evidence of what the panic is tied to. OPTIONS_FILE_SET+=RELRO
ise is just what was new/unusual in the portmaster -DKa that was going on when
the rpi2 had the panic.]
The console history shows (the cc quoted just gives a ball park for where it
was in the binutils build):
> cc -D
For the record ...
On 08/26/16 20:10, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
On 26/08/2016 19:00, Warner Losh wrote:
...
I think we should move forward, just want to make sure it doesn’t
break some arch completely before moving ahead. While lld is a goal,
the goal is also to have a ld.bdf installed for 12, i
On 26/08/2016 19:00, Warner Losh wrote:
On Aug 26, 2016, at 12:25 PM, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
On 26/08/2016 11:48, Warner Losh wrote:
On Aug 26, 2016, at 9:14 AM, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
Hello;
On 08/26/16 10:06, Warner Losh wrote:
On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 9:00 AM, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
On 0
> On Aug 26, 2016, at 12:25 PM, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
>
>
>
> On 26/08/2016 11:48, Warner Losh wrote:
>>> On Aug 26, 2016, at 9:14 AM, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello;
>>>
>>> On 08/26/16 10:06, Warner Losh wrote:
On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 9:00 AM, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
>
> On
On 26/08/2016 11:48, Warner Losh wrote:
On Aug 26, 2016, at 9:14 AM, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
Hello;
On 08/26/16 10:06, Warner Losh wrote:
On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 9:00 AM, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
On 08/26/16 05:56, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 05:50:31PM -0500, Pedro Giff
> On Aug 26, 2016, at 9:20 AM, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
>
>
>
> On 08/26/16 10:08, Warner Losh wrote:
>> On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 9:06 AM, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 08/26/16 10:01, Warner Losh wrote:
On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 8:36 AM, Ed Maste wrote:
>
> On 26 August
> On Aug 26, 2016, at 9:14 AM, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
>
> Hello;
>
> On 08/26/16 10:06, Warner Losh wrote:
>> On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 9:00 AM, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 08/26/16 05:56, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 05:50:31PM -0500, Pedro Giffuni wrote
Hello;
On 26/08/2016 11:00, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 10:00:58AM -0500, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
On 08/26/16 05:56, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 05:50:31PM -0500, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
Hello;
GNU RELRO support was committed in r230784 (2012-01-30) b
On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 10:00:58AM -0500, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
>
>
> On 08/26/16 05:56, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 05:50:31PM -0500, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
> >> Hello;
> >>
> >> GNU RELRO support was committed in r230784 (2012-01-30) but we never
> >> enabled it by defau
On 08/26/16 10:08, Warner Losh wrote:
On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 9:06 AM, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
On 08/26/16 10:01, Warner Losh wrote:
On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 8:36 AM, Ed Maste wrote:
On 26 August 2016 at 10:18, Warner Losh wrote:
So what's the summary of why we'd want to do that? What
Hello;
On 08/26/16 10:06, Warner Losh wrote:
On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 9:00 AM, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
On 08/26/16 05:56, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 05:50:31PM -0500, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
Hello;
GNU RELRO support was committed in r230784 (2012-01-30) but we never
ena
On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 9:06 AM, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
>
>
> On 08/26/16 10:01, Warner Losh wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 8:36 AM, Ed Maste wrote:
>>>
>>> On 26 August 2016 at 10:18, Warner Losh wrote:
So what's the summary of why we'd want to do that? What benefit does it
>
On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 9:00 AM, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
>
>
> On 08/26/16 05:56, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 05:50:31PM -0500, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello;
>>>
>>> GNU RELRO support was committed in r230784 (2012-01-30) but we never
>>> enabled it by default.
>>>
On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 8:36 AM, Ed Maste wrote:
> On 26 August 2016 at 10:18, Warner Losh 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
> vulnerabil
On 08/26/16 05:56, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 05:50:31PM -0500, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
Hello;
GNU RELRO support was committed in r230784 (2012-01-30) but we never
enabled it by default.
There was some discussion about it on
https://reviews.freebsd.org/D3001
By now, all
On 26 August 2016 at 10:18, Warner Losh 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
On 26 Aug 2016, at 15:18, Warner Losh 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 reduce the attack surface for code reuse attacks: non-PLT GOT entries are
read-only and so can’t be manipulated by a memory safe
2016-08-26 16:18 GMT+02:00 Warner Losh :
>> GNU RELRO support was committed in r230784 (2012-01-30) but we never enabled
>> it by default.
>
> 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?
In a nutshell:
ELF files that contain r
On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 4:50 PM, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
> Hello;
>
> GNU RELRO support was committed in r230784 (2012-01-30) but we never enabled
> it by default.
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?
Warner
___
On 26 Aug 2016, at 11:56, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
>
>> I think it's time to enable it be default in our base binutils. If
>> there are no objections, I will just commit the attached patch over
>> the weekend.
>
> There are objections, the change must be runtime tested on large and
> represent
On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 05:50:31PM -0500, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
> Hello;
>
> GNU RELRO support was committed in r230784 (2012-01-30) but we never
> enabled it by default.
>
> There was some discussion about it on
> https://reviews.freebsd.org/D3001
>
> By now, all Linux distributions, NetBSD and
24 matches
Mail list logo
