From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/7285 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Szabolcs Nagy Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general Subject: Re: buffer overflow in regcomp and a way to find more of those Date: Sun, 29 Mar 2015 00:15:21 +0100 Message-ID: <20150328231520.GH3071@port70.net> References: <20150321015619.GU23507@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <20150321022023.GW23507@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <20150321132810.GI16260@port70.net> <20150323123540.GP16260@port70.net> <20150328220018.GG3071@port70.net> <20150328223833.GD6817@brightrain.aerifal.cx> Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1427584537 7209 80.91.229.3 (28 Mar 2015 23:15:37 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 28 Mar 2015 23:15:37 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Konstantin Serebryany , musl@lists.openwall.com To: Rich Felker Original-X-From: musl-return-7298-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Sun Mar 29 00:15:36 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200]) by plane.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Ybzx0-0006Pj-Sm for gllmg-musl@m.gmane.org; Sun, 29 Mar 2015 00:15:34 +0100 Original-Received: (qmail 30132 invoked by uid 550); 28 Mar 2015 23:15:33 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Original-Received: (qmail 30114 invoked from network); 28 Mar 2015 23:15:33 -0000 Mail-Followup-To: Rich Felker , Konstantin Serebryany , musl@lists.openwall.com Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20150328223833.GD6817@brightrain.aerifal.cx> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:7285 Archived-At: * Rich Felker [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)