Date: Sun, 29 Mar 2015 00:15:21 +0100 From: Szabolcs Nagy <nsz@...t70.net> To: Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org> Cc: Konstantin Serebryany <konstantin.s.serebryany@...il.com>, musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: buffer overflow in regcomp and a way to find more of those * Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org> [2015-03-28 18:38:33 -0400]: > On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 at 03:32:41PM -0700, Konstantin Serebryany wrote: > > > > > > i guess it is possible to have a /lib/ld-muslasan-x86_64.so.1 > > > and Scrt1asan.o on a system and the compiler/linker could > > > use those when compiling some code with asan+cov instrumentation > > > > sounds great. > > I'm not clear why there would be a different dynamic linker pathname > for it. It's not a different ABI from the application's standpoint, is > it? It seems like you might _want_ to install the dynamic linker with > a different name or location just to avoid clobbering the non-asan > build, but I don't think it needs a dedicated name/location like it > would if it were an ABI/ISA. > if you only instrument libc and not the application then there is no difference between the two libcs from app pov but if you want to instrument the application too then it must use the the libc which does the shadow management and has the asan rt the name does not have to be dedicated if asan instrumented binaries are only used locally/temporarily for testing (an instrumented library can only be used with the asan libc, but a non-instrumented lib should work with both libcs)
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.