| 1 |
On Sun, Oct 24, 2010 at 11:31 AM, Magnus Granberg <zorry@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Sunday 24 October 2010 10.04.34 Kfir Lavi wrote: |
| 3 |
>> On Sun, Oct 24, 2010 at 3:34 AM, Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@×××.net> wrote: |
| 4 |
>> > Magnus Granberg posted on Sun, 24 Oct 2010 03:01:40 +0200 as excerpted: |
| 5 |
>> > > Display-If-Install: <sys-devel/gcc-4.4 |
| 6 |
>> > |
| 7 |
>> > Typo: |
| 8 |
>> > |
| 9 |
>> > Display-If-Installed: |
| 10 |
>> > ^^ |
| 11 |
>> > |
| 12 |
>> > Meanwhile, the title reflects hardened profiles, but the updated |
| 13 |
>> > conditions aren't viewed only on hardened. The no-support-for-<gcc-4 |
| 14 |
>> > policy would seem reasonable for most profiles (don't know about the |
| 15 |
>> > exotic archs). Either the title should be updated to reflect that it |
| 16 |
>> > applies in general (not just on hardened), or the condition to display |
| 17 |
>> > only on hardened should be maintained. Either way, making it clearer in |
| 18 |
>> > the body as well would be wise, so people seeing it only on hardened (if |
| 19 |
>> > it applies only to them, for example) will have less chance of missing |
| 20 |
>> > that, if they have regular installs as well. |
| 21 |
>> > |
| 22 |
>> > But I don't remember whether multiple conditions are ANDed or ORed; they |
| 23 |
>> > should be ANDed here, if it's to apply to ONLY hardened with <gcc-4.4 |
| 24 |
>> > installed. |
| 25 |
>> > |
| 26 |
>> > -- |
| 27 |
>> > Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. |
| 28 |
>> > "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- |
| 29 |
>> > and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman |
| 30 |
>> |
| 31 |
>> Hi all, |
| 32 |
>> After reading this post I went to wikipedia to read about the SSP. |
| 33 |
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buffer_overflow_protection |
| 34 |
>> At the paragraph "GCC Stack-Smashing Protector (ProPolice)", its written" |
| 35 |
>> |
| 36 |
>> "It was implemented as a patch to GCC 3.x; a less intrusive |
| 37 |
>> reimplementation is included in the GCC 4.1 release. Currently, SSP is |
| 38 |
>> standard in OpenBSD, FreeBSD (since 8.0), Ubuntu (since 8.04 LTS[3]), |
| 39 |
>> and DragonFly BSD. It is also available in NetBSD (enabled by default |
| 40 |
>> on x86), Debian and Gentoo, disabled by default." |
| 41 |
>> |
| 42 |
>> Now this should be changed, if the SSP flag is becoming default. |
| 43 |
>> |
| 44 |
>> Regards, |
| 45 |
>> Kfir |
| 46 |
> Updated the news item. |
| 47 |
> Thanks for the notes Duncan. |
| 48 |
> @Kfir It is only the hardened gcc that have the SSP enable as default. |
| 49 |
> We can add that Gentoo (Hardened) have it enable. |
| 50 |
> |
| 51 |
> /Magnus |
| 52 |
> /Magnus |
| 53 |
> |
| 54 |
Ok, |
| 55 |
I have modified the SSP section in wikipedia. |
| 56 |
|
| 57 |
Regards, |
| 58 |
Kfir |
Archives