Hello!
On Fri, Dec 15, 2006 at 08:36:09PM +0100, I wrote:
> I created the following patch to be able to continue building GRUB2 on
> systems that have `-fstack-protector' enabled by default. (This patch is
> equal to what we've been using in GNU Mach for some time now.)
>
>
> 2006-12-15 Thomas
Hello!
On Wed, Nov 08, 2006 at 10:40:54PM +0100, I wrote:
> For some time, GCC now offers the following feature:
>
> info Gcc
> #v+
> `-fstack-protector'
> Emit extra code to check for buffer overflows, such as stack
> smashing attacks. This is done by adding a guard variable to
>
Hi,
Thomas Schwinge, le Mon 13 Nov 2006 19:29:53 +0100, a écrit :
> +unsigned int __stack_chk_guard = 12345;
I'd say this should be something like a value with higher bits set, so
that it wouldn't be a valid pointer, even for reading.
Samuel
___
Grub
Hello!
On Wed, Nov 08, 2006 at 11:36:20PM +0100, I wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 08, 2006 at 11:14:19PM +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > Thomas Schwinge, le Wed 08 Nov 2006 22:40:54 +0100, a ?crit :
> > > Is it feasible to have the `-fstack-protector' functionality in GNU Mach
> > > and GRUB2 (and how to
Hi,
Stefan Reinauer, le Wed 08 Nov 2006 23:36:44 +0100, a écrit :
> * Samuel Thibault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [061108 23:14]:
> > Thomas Schwinge, le Wed 08 Nov 2006 22:40:54 +0100, a écrit :
> > > then cat gnumach-undef-bad; exit 2; else true; fi
> > > stack_chk_fail
> > >
> > > Is it feasib
Hi,
* Samuel Thibault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [061108 23:14]:
> Thomas Schwinge, le Wed 08 Nov 2006 22:40:54 +0100, a écrit :
> > then cat gnumach-undef-bad; exit 2; else true; fi
> > stack_chk_fail
> >
> > Is it feasible to have the `-fstack-protector' functionality in GNU Mach
> > and GRUB2
Hello!
On Wed, Nov 08, 2006 at 11:14:19PM +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Thomas Schwinge, le Wed 08 Nov 2006 22:40:54 +0100, a ?crit :
> > Is it feasible to have the `-fstack-protector' functionality in GNU Mach
> > and GRUB2 (and how to do that, then) or shall we unconditionally pass
> > `-fno-s
Hi,
Thomas Schwinge, le Wed 08 Nov 2006 22:40:54 +0100, a écrit :
> then cat gnumach-undef-bad; exit 2; else true; fi
> stack_chk_fail
>
> Is it feasible to have the `-fstack-protector' functionality in GNU Mach
> and GRUB2 (and how to do that, then) or shall we unconditionally pass
> `-f
[Please keep both and in the
recipients list.]
Hello!
For some time, GCC now offers the following feature:
info Gcc
#v+
`-fstack-protector'
Emit extra code to check for buffer overflows, such as stack
smashing attacks. This is done by adding a guard variable to
functions with
