[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20141105162018.GW22465@brightrain.aerifal.cx>
Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2014 11:20:18 -0500
From: Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: fixing -fPIE + -fstack-protector-all
On Wed, Nov 05, 2014 at 05:01:31PM +0100, John Spencer wrote:
> Rich Felker wrote:
> >On Wed, Nov 05, 2014 at 04:25:03PM +0100, John Spencer wrote:
> >>using -fPIE + -fstack-protector-all is currently broken for a number
> >>of architectures (most notably i386) in the default gcc setup
> >>(including the musl-cross patches), as it depends on a
> >>libssp_nonshared.a which provides __stack_chk_fail_local().
> >
> >As discussed on IRC, I would _like_ to be able to simply add the
> >following to crt/i386/crti.s:
> >
> >__stack_chk_fail_local: hlt
> >
> >and equivalent for other archs. This has the added benefit of
> >effecting a crash without going through the PLT (whereas
> >libssp_nonshared.a's __stack_chk_fail_local calls __stack_chk_fail via
> >the PLT) so it's not vulnerable to attacks that have overwritten the
> >GOT with malicious pointers.
> >
> >However, this proposed solution breaks one odd corner case: static
> >linking when all the source files were compiled with -fPIC or -fPIE.
> >In that case, there would be no references to __stack_chk_fail, only
> >to __stack_chk_fail_local, and thereby __init_ssp would not get
> >linked, and a zero canary would be used.
> >
> >One possible way to handle this would be giving up the conditional
> >linking of ssp init and just always initializing it. The .o file is 78
> >bytes on i386 and 70 bytes on x86_64, but there would also be some
> >savings to offset the cost simply from having the code inline in
> >__init_libc rather than as an external function.
>
> that sounds reasonable. do you intend add this symbol and the
> mandatory init_ssp code even to archs that don't need it (for
> example x86_64) ?
Right now I don't have a specific "intent" since this is just an idea.
But I think it would probably be ugly, and preclude the inlining, to
do the __init_ssp stuff differently on different archs. The local
symbol could of course be omitted on archs that don't use it, but it
doesn't hurt to have it either.
Rich
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
