On Tue, May 4, 2021 at 12:43 PM Klemens Nanni <k...@openbsd.org> wrote: ...
> I compared my corrupted shared library with an intact copy from ports > and it showed that the corrupted one was simply zeroed out at some point > (not truncated) until the end, e.g. readelf(1)'s `-h' or `-l' report > "Error: no .dynamic section in the dynamic segment". > > So this isn't a case of some badly linked library or one that has a few > bits flipped, it's simply a partial one... seems like bad luck? > IMHO, the benefit of adding this check is almost zero: it gives a slightly better experience for a small set of possible data corruption cases, when similar corruptions that affect other pages aren't helped at all as it'll crash when it executes zeroed text, or accesses zeroed data, or fails to find a required symbol because the symbol table was zeroed out. If we want to protect against that sort of hardware lossage, then a filesystem which does so is the way to go, not an alarm on one window of a glass house. Philip Guenther
