Gentoo Archives: gentoo-hardened

From: "Tóth Attila" <atoth@××××××××××.hu>
To: gentoo-hardened@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-hardened] New GCC options: -fcf-protection & -fstack-clash-protection
Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2019 18:56:14
Message-Id: 4f9add6b2d676645e271c50cb0ac5255.squirrel@atoth.sote.hu
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-hardened] New GCC options: -fcf-protection & -fstack-clash-protection by Javier Juan Martinez Cabezon
1 I'm not a lawyer either, but it's not legal to copy RAP, especially since
2 the great crisis. It's trademarked and protected. It's a pity some
3 companies abused the goodwill of the developers and misused grsec
4 technologies in the past.
5 Dw.
6 --
7 dr Tóth Attila, Radiológus, 06-20-825-8057
8 Attila Toth MD, Radiologist, +36-20-825-8057
9
10 2019.Február 24.(V) 19:18 időpontban Javier Juan Martinez Cabezon ezt írta:
11 >
12 > It's would be feasible to include Grsec RAP gcc plugin in gentoo hardened?
13 >
14 > I think it would be a better alternative than fcf-protection does
15 >
16 >
17 > On 24/02/19 16:16, "Tóth Attila" wrote:
18 >> Dear Guillaume,
19 >>
20 >> I'm not a Gentoo Dev either.
21 >>
22 >> If there's a place to promote useful gcc flags from their security
23 >> aspect,
24 >> Gentoo Hardened is a good place to become a leader of such efforts -
25 >> like
26 >> it happened in the past.
27 >>
28 >> 1. Regarding fcf-protection:
29 >> "Currently the x86 GNU/Linux target provides an implementation based on
30 >> Intel Control-flow Enforcement Technology (CET)."
31 >> - anybody knows which Intel processor actually supports that since its
32 >> announcement in 2016?
33 >> - also it worth to take a look at on these comments by Spender @
34 >> grsecurity:
35 >> https://grsecurity.net/effectiveness_of_intel_cet_against_code_reuse_attacks.php
36 >> It would be good if hardware developers would discuss their plans with
37 >> more security experts before they put something into production.
38 >>
39 >> 2. Regarding stack-clash
40 >> "Most targets do not fully support stack clash protection."
41 >> - some information would be helpful to elaborate a little bit more on
42 >> "not
43 >> fully" and exactly which targets we are talking about. Anybody has a
44 >> more
45 >> detailed documentation?
46 >>
47 >> Best regards:
48 >> Dw.
49 >>
50 >
51 >

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-hardened] New GCC options: -fcf-protection & -fstack-clash-protection Guillaume Ceccarelli <guillaume@××××××××××××.com>