From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C628113838B for ; Tue, 23 Sep 2014 14:42:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id EF435E09DF; Tue, 23 Sep 2014 14:42:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EA79AE09B7 for ; Tue, 23 Sep 2014 14:42:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 079BA33FE88 for ; Tue, 23 Sep 2014 14:42:45 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new using ClamAV at gentoo.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.682 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.682 tagged_above=-999 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=-0.277, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.703, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=unavailable Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([IPv6:::ffff:127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [IPv6:::ffff:127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Yur-c3HxWn0n for ; Tue, 23 Sep 2014 14:42:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from plane.gmane.org (plane.gmane.org [80.91.229.3]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0C2CC33FE13 for ; Tue, 23 Sep 2014 14:42:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1XWRIX-000808-Lz for gentoo-user@gentoo.org; Tue, 23 Sep 2014 16:42:34 +0200 Received: from rrcs-71-40-157-251.se.biz.rr.com ([71.40.157.251]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 23 Sep 2014 16:42:33 +0200 Received: from wireless by rrcs-71-40-157-251.se.biz.rr.com with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 23 Sep 2014 16:42:33 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org From: James Subject: [gentoo-user] Re: "stack-protector-strong" option results in gcc error Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2014 14:42:18 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <20140923024941.GA2848@waltdnes.org> <20140923115204.GA23337@TranscendTheRubicon.alshain.ring0> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: sea.gmane.org User-Agent: Loom/3.14 (http://gmane.org/) X-Loom-IP: 71.40.157.251 (Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:29.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/29.0 SeaMonkey/2.26.1) X-Archives-Salt: 72a7fa4c-736a-47ef-9465-878640533836 X-Archives-Hash: 71f4cdf12eb8d543d851123b5aa2a7a2 Rich Freeman gentoo.org> writes: > > '-fstack-protector-strong' is supported as of gcc-4.9.x - unless you > > upgrade, you'll forced to use the regular one. > > I think it's not even that unlikely that you don't even want the strong > > version. > Ironically enough, your last sentence overflowed my parsing stack. :) From: https://securityblog.redhat.com/tag/stack-protector/ "The GCC flags -fstack-protector and -fstack-protector-all activate the Stack Smashing Protector (SSP). When any of these flags are used, GCC instruments the function return instruction with a probabilistic check that the stack frame is not corrupted. " From: http://www.outflux.net/blog/archives/2014/01/27/fstack-protector-strong/ "The stack protector feature itself adds a known canary to the stack during function preamble, and checks it when the function returns. " Bug 517428 was/is a request to setup Ftrace/trace-cmd/KernelShark as a fine-grained tool, for such issuses as fstack-protector events. As we all know, I'm still struggling with learning the ebuild_gymnasitcs, but bug 517428 is looking(begging) for a knowledgable person to get an Ftrace/trace-cmd/kernelshark ebuild working. This will provide a fantastic tool for low-level as well as application code diagnostics. :) hth, James [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ftrace