| 1 |
On Sun, 7 Nov 2004 20:43:27 +0900, Jason Stubbs <jstubbs@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> The truth of the matter, as far as I can see, is that nobody cares enough |
| 3 |
> about this issue to put the effort into planning, coordinating and executing |
| 4 |
> a given solution. Somebody, please prove me wrong. |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
Whenever anybody has proposed such things they get shot down quickly, |
| 7 |
mainly by the "we must remain backwardly compatible" crowd (or |
| 8 |
something the "that is planned for future versions, but not yet" |
| 9 |
crowd). With such a fundamental security problem backward |
| 10 |
compatibility should be thrown out of the window; it's more important |
| 11 |
to fix the vulnerabilities. But thats just my opinion. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
Another problem is that a lot of people here don't seem to care about |
| 14 |
security. We even had people arguing against stack-protector as |
| 15 |
default because of a theoretical 3% performance hit on some rare types |
| 16 |
of code. Even Microsoft with its poor security record is using stack |
| 17 |
protection compilers now! |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
-- |
| 20 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives