Archives
Archives
| From: | Mike Frysinger <vapier@g.o> | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| To: | gentoo-hardened@l.g.o | ||
| Subject: | Re: [gentoo-hardened] Re: GOT protection | ||
| Date: | Tue, 31 Oct 2006 09:33:42 | ||
| Message-Id: | 200610310431.26320.vapier@gentoo.org | ||
| In Reply to: | [gentoo-hardened] Re: GOT protection by 7v5w7go9ub0o <7v5w7go9ub0o@gmail.com> | ||
| 1 | On Tuesday 17 October 2006 12:14, 7v5w7go9ub0o wrote: |
| 2 | > 1. The reference seems to be a discussion of possibilities that were not |
| 3 | > implemented? Is this history, or an ongoing debate? |
| 4 | |
| 5 | we will be moving to relro by default in binutils itself |
| 6 | |
| 7 | > 2. So does this mean that in anticipation of new binutils, we should add |
| 8 | > LDFLAGS="-Wl,z,norelro" to make.conf? |
| 9 | |
| 10 | if you arent running a binutils that supports relro, you've got a lot bigger |
| 11 | problems |
| 12 | -mike |