From owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG  Sun Dec 30 14:54:23 2007
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ECBD316A417
	for <freebsd-security@freebsd.org>;
	Sun, 30 Dec 2007 14:54:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from des@des.no)
Received: from tim.des.no (tim.des.no [194.63.250.121])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A5DC913C465
	for <freebsd-security@freebsd.org>;
	Sun, 30 Dec 2007 14:54:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from des@des.no)
Received: from tim.des.no (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by spam.des.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D90B20B9;
	Sun, 30 Dec 2007 15:54:15 +0100 (CET)
X-Spam-Tests: AWL
X-Spam-Learn: disabled
X-Spam-Score: -0.1/3.0
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on tim.des.no
Received: from ds4.des.no (des.no [80.203.243.180])
	by smtp.des.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 006B92099;
	Sun, 30 Dec 2007 15:54:14 +0100 (CET)
Received: by ds4.des.no (Postfix, from userid 1001)
	id 02005844A7; Sun, 30 Dec 2007 15:54:14 +0100 (CET)
From: =?utf-8?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=C3=B8rgrav?= <des@des.no>
To: Anders Hanssen <anders@rethink.no>
References: <477277FF.30504@googlemail.com> <86myrvhht9.fsf@ds4.des.no>
	<20071227195833.154b41ae@kan.dnsalias.net>
	<4774EB0F.90103@googlemail.com>
	<20071228200428.J6052@odysseus.silby.com>
	<47779402.7060105@rethink.no>
Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2007 15:54:14 +0100
In-Reply-To: <47779402.7060105@rethink.no> (Anders Hanssen's message of "Sun\, 
	30 Dec 2007 13\:50\:10 +0100")
Message-ID: <86r6h4teqx.fsf@ds4.des.no>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/22.1 (berkeley-unix)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: Gunther Mayer <gunther.mayer@googlemail.com>, freebsd-security@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: ProPolice/SSP in 7.0
X-BeenThere: freebsd-security@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Security issues \[members-only posting\]"
	<freebsd-security.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-security>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-security-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-security>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-security@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-security-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-security>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-security-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2007 14:54:24 -0000

Anders Hanssen <anders@rethink.no> writes:
> A look at the generated code confirms it does not use ssp for overrun()
>
> void
> overrun(const char *str)
> {
>     int x;
>     char a[4];
>     int y;
>
>     strcpy(a, str);
>     printf("hi");
> }
>
> # gcc -S -fstack-protector test.c

Use -fstack-protector-all instead.

> Anyway, I don't know why gcc fail to see that overrun() needs
> protection.

Because you didn't RTFM...

DES
--=20
Dag-Erling Sm=C3=B8rgrav - des@des.no