This is the mail archive of the libc-alpha@sourceware.org mailing list for the glibc project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [PATCH BZ#20422] Do not allow asan/msan/tsan and fortify at the same time.


On Sat, Oct 01, 2016 at 02:38:24PM -0700, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 2:23 PM, Kostya Serebryany <kcc@google.com> wrote:
> > 80 interceptors to support *san and fortification is 80 too many, IMHO.
> > The fact that other pre-compiled libraries use fortify by default is very sad.
> > I think this is a clear case of misuse of fortify because now users of
> > the library can't opt out.
> 
> Why do you think this is very sad?  This is not a misuse of fortify
> but rather santizers not adapting to the changing environments and
> handling how people are treating security issues now.  Remember 10
> years ago there was no such thing as fortification and security was

Well, -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 has been used heavily already 10 years ago.
But I certainly don't find anything sad on the fact that many programs
are fortified, it is a good thing.

> not treated as a first class citizen.  Now Security is treated as a
> first class and people are requiring security before anything else.

	Jakub


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]