Gentoo Archives: gentoo-hardened

From: pageexec@××××××××.hu
To: gentoo-hardened@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-hardened] SSP + setjmp() = badness?
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2006 18:01:09
Message-Id: 44CFB230.19734.4CD8CF80@pageexec.freemail.hu
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-hardened] SSP + setjmp() = badness? by Ned Ludd
1 On 31 Jul 2006 at 17:41, Ned Ludd wrote:
2 > I think the major problem we are facing here is how to cleanly upgrade
3 > from 3.x to 4.x. symbol names have changed. And using the stub/aliases
4 > method Peter used in uClibc svn allows the __guard to be overwritten.
5
6 what do you mean by that? i thought the guard was in writable memory
7 anyway...
8
9 > Flags are missing etc.
10
11 what flags?
12
13 > Upstream also destroyed the value of the handler.
14
15 in what sense? i thought that 4.x also had a reporting function...
16
17 --
18 gentoo-hardened@g.o mailing list

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-hardened] SSP + setjmp() = badness? "Kevin F. Quinn" <kevquinn@g.o>