Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2015 23:07:02 +0100
From: Emese Revfy <>
To: Josh Triplett <>
Cc: Kees Cook <>, Greg KH <>,
 <>, PaX Team <>,
 Brad Spengler <>, Theodore Tso <>
Subject: Re: Proposal for kernel self protection features

> I agree in both cases: having the plugin usable in "make it so" mode for
> the benefit of legacy or out-of-tree code, and having it usable in
> "suggest changes to the source" (or outright *edit* the source and
> produce a patch) mode to avoid actually mandating the plugin.  Not least
> of which because I'd find it surprising if the plugin ever worked across
> as broad a range of GCC versions as the kernel typically wants to
> support.

All gcc plugins in PaX support all plugin capable gcc versions (4.5-5). 
This is PaXTeam's requirement if somebody writes a plugin for PaX.
And of course the plugin infrastructure handles gcc versions that don't
support plugins.


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.