Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2017 19:54:38 +0100
From: "PaX Team" <>
To: Mark Rutland <>
CC:, Kees Cook <>,
        Emese Revfy <>,
        "AKASHI, Takahiro" <>,
        park jinbum <>,
        Daniel Micay <>,,
Subject: Re: [PATCH] gcc-plugins: Add structleak for more stack initialization

On 17 Jan 2017 at 17:48, Mark Rutland wrote:

> That being the case, (and given the relevant bug has now been fixed),
> it's not clear to me what the value of this is today. i.e. given the
> general case, is this preventing many leaks?

no idea, i stopped looking at the instrumentation log long ago, but everyone
can enable the debug output (has a very specific comment on it ;) and look at
the results. i keep this plugin around because it costs nothing to maintain
it and the alternative (better) solution doesn't exist yet.

> > i never went into that direction because i think the security goal can
> > be achieved without the performance impact of forced initialization.
> Was there a particular technique you had in mind?

sure, i mentioned it in my SSTIC'12 keynote (page 36):

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.