Re: [gentoo-dev] Stack smash protected daemons

[Marius Mauch]

On 09/22/04  John Richard Moser wrote:

> | What exactly would that FEATURE do ? If it really only affects
> | CFLAGS I don't see the need for another FEATURE flag at all. We
> | already have ~30 different flags, please lets try to avoid another
> | USE desaster by not adding new flags for trivial stuff.
> |
>
> Users could add -fstack-protector for global stack smash protection;
> what's proposed here is to alter certain packages to use
> - -fstack-protector based on their risk factor (the proposed measure
> of risk factor is if they're daemons, or if they're SETUID (chmod
> +s)).

...
 
> Does this clearly enough illustrate the difference?  Rather than
> protecting everything including, say, ufed vim and gedit, only the
> obvious players are given extra padding (it's more like lightweight
> bioarmor; padding is clunky and reduces dexterity too much).

No, it doesn't. FEATURES is definitely *not* for package specific stuff
(as I said earlier), so if at all this would be a USE thing.

Marius