From: Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com>
To: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc: Joshua Lock <joshua.g.lock@intel.com>,
openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] security_flags: ensure changes to SHARED_OBJECTS cause recompile
Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 10:11:00 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3E96D261-8098-4FC3-9437-15613450DD05@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1471622541.16712.52.camel@linuxfoundation.org>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2140 bytes --]
> On Aug 19, 2016, at 9:02 AM, Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2016-08-19 at 16:34 +0100, Joshua Lock wrote:
>> Add the SHARED_OBJECTS variable to SECURITY_LDFLAGS vardeps so that
>> changing SHARED_OBJECTS causes do_compile to re-run.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Joshua Lock <joshua.g.lock@intel.com>
>> ---
>> meta/conf/distro/include/security_flags.inc | 1 +
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/meta/conf/distro/include/security_flags.inc
>> b/meta/conf/distro/include/security_flags.inc
>> index 295c733..901c841 100644
>> --- a/meta/conf/distro/include/security_flags.inc
>> +++ b/meta/conf/distro/include/security_flags.inc
>> @@ -24,6 +24,7 @@ SECURITY_CFLAGS ?= "-fstack-protector-strong -
>> -param ssp-buffer-size=4 -pie -fpi
>> SECURITY_NO_PIE_CFLAGS ?= "-fstack-protector-strong --param ssp
>> -buffer-size=4 ${lcl_maybe_fortify} ${SECURITY_STRINGFORMAT}"
>>
>> SECURITY_LDFLAGS ?= "-Wl,-z,relro,-z,now${pie_ld}"
>> +SECURITY_LDFLAGS[vardeps] += "SHARED_OBJECTS"
>
> Surely you want:
>
> pid_ld[vardeps] += "SHARED_OBJECTS"
>
> ?
>
> Also, you mention SHARED_OBJECTS defaults to "0", where is that? I am a
> little worried the variable name is also a bit generic? Setting this in
> the following way:
>
> SECURITY_SHARED_OBJECTS = "-fpie"
> SECURITY_SHARED_OBJECTS_pn-XXX = ""
>
> may be more in keeping with the way the rest of the file is written and
> avoids games with base_conditional and vardeps?
>
> I am also worried about trying to maintain a large list like this, the
> idea was to reduce the number of exceptions, not build lists which will
> ever increase :(. I can't see this scaling.
I agree with you here. I am mulling over a proposal for architecture change in 2.3
where we harden the toolchain by default and then dont have to keep the securiry
band-aid. Opinion?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Richard
> --
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-core mailing list
> Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
[-- Attachment #2: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 211 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-08-19 17:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-08-19 15:34 [PATCH 0/5] security_flags: additions in line with common practice Joshua Lock
2016-08-19 15:34 ` [PATCH 1/5] security_flags: remove invalid linker option Joshua Lock
2016-08-19 17:05 ` Khem Raj
2016-08-19 18:29 ` Joshua G Lock
2016-08-19 15:34 ` [PATCH 2/5] security_flags: pass ssp-buffer-size param to stack protector Joshua Lock
2016-08-19 17:07 ` Khem Raj
2016-08-19 18:46 ` Joshua G Lock
2016-08-22 8:02 ` André Draszik
2016-08-22 10:42 ` Joshua Lock
2016-08-19 15:34 ` [PATCH 3/5] security_flags: link position independent executables Joshua Lock
2016-08-19 15:34 ` [PATCH 4/5] security_flags: update comment header Joshua Lock
2016-08-19 15:34 ` [PATCH 5/5] security_flags: ensure changes to SHARED_OBJECTS cause recompile Joshua Lock
2016-08-19 16:02 ` Richard Purdie
2016-08-19 17:11 ` Khem Raj [this message]
2016-08-19 18:26 ` Joshua G Lock
2016-08-19 18:26 ` Joshua G Lock
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=3E96D261-8098-4FC3-9437-15613450DD05@gmail.com \
--to=raj.khem@gmail.com \
--cc=joshua.g.lock@intel.com \
--cc=openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org \
--cc=richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox