Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2012 08:48:16 -0400
From: Rich Felker <>
Subject: Re: ldso: dlclose.

On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 02:39:38PM +0200, Arvid E. Picciani wrote:
> On Sun, 19 Aug 2012 20:48:03 -0400, Rich Felker wrote:
> >To elaborate, removing a DSO from a process's address space is highly
> >non-trivial and error-prone.
> In fact it doesn't even work correctly in glibc.
> It's just that usually no one notices.

Indeed, and they closed my bug report about it as invalid. I've
refiled the bug with binutils, which has the -z nodelete option,
requesting that this option be made default. Only libraries
intentionally marked as unload-safe should be unloadable.

Anyway, unless the issue is fixed in binutils so that the vast
majority of libraries are marked non-unloadable, I don't see anything
we can do in musl. "glibc does it that way too" is not an excuse for
adding unsafe/non-robust behavior to musl.


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.