| 1 |
On Sun, 2004-11-07 at 08:23, Michael Tindal wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> Microsoft _does_ ship stack-protection compiler now, however, the switch |
| 4 |
> is only enabled for core system components, not every piece of software |
| 5 |
> distributed. Its definitely not on by default. A 3% performance hit |
| 6 |
> isnt the only reason its shot down, |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
shot down? |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
> -fstack-protector is only a |
| 11 |
> band-aid, |
| 12 |
*sigh* |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
> and breaks a lot of programs. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
*sigh* I really dislike people spreading Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt |
| 17 |
about SSP because it only make our job harder. So please give us a |
| 18 |
detailed list of this "alot" of programs you claim it breaks and please |
| 19 |
show how it's SSP breaking the programs in question and not SSP showing |
| 20 |
you that the program in question is already fundamentally broken. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
-- |
| 23 |
Ned Ludd <solar@g.o> |
| 24 |
Gentoo (hardened,security,infrastructure,embedded) Developer |
Archives