Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 16 Oct 2014 17:37:19 -0500
From:      Bryan Drewery <bdrewery@FreeBSD.org>
To:        Shawn Webb <lattera@gmail.com>, Jeremie Le Hen <jlh@freebsd.org>
Cc:        hunger@hunger.hu, David Carlier <david.carlier@hardenedbsd.org>, Oliver Pinter <oliver.pntr@gmail.com>, Sean Bruno <sbruno@freebsd.org>, Konstantin Belousov <kib@freebsd.org>, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org, PaX Team <pageexec@freemail.hu>
Subject:   Re: PIE/PIC support on base
Message-ID:  <5440489F.3080602@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <CADt0fhzg5G1cLEBNfHXSEi9iP7mCP=8sSwpXbFobig=pm=QsFQ@mail.gmail.com>
References:  <CAMe1fxaYn%2BJaKzGXx%2Bywv8F0mKDo72g=W23KUWOKZzpm8wX4Tg@mail.gmail.com>	<CAGSa5y3s9r0DRyinfqV=PJc_BT=Em-SLfwhD25nP0=6ki9pHWw@mail.gmail.com>	<CAMe1fxaBEc5T77xjpRsMi_kkc5LXwPGooLWTO9C1FJcLSPnO8w@mail.gmail.com>	<CAGSa5y2=bKpaeLO_S5W%2B1YGq02WMgCZn_5bbEMw%2Bx3j-MYDOoA@mail.gmail.com> <CADt0fhzg5G1cLEBNfHXSEi9iP7mCP=8sSwpXbFobig=pm=QsFQ@mail.gmail.com>

index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail

[-- Attachment #1 --]
On 10/16/2014 5:15 PM, Shawn Webb wrote:
> 
> 
> On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 5:59 PM, Jeremie Le Hen <jlh@freebsd.org
> <mailto:jlh@freebsd.org>> wrote:
> 
>     On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 8:21 PM, David Carlier
>     <david.carlier@hardenedbsd.org
>     <mailto:david.carlier@hardenedbsd.org>> wrote:
>     >
>     > I chose the "atomic" approach, at the moment very few binaries are
>     > concerned at the moment. So I applied INCLUDE_PIC_ARCHIVE in the needed
>     > libraries plus created WITH_PIE which add fPIE/fpie -pie flags only if you
>     > include <bsd.prog.pie.mk <http://bsd.prog.pie.mk>>; (which include
>     <bsd.prog.mk <http://bsd.prog.mk>>...) otherwise other
>     > binaries include <bsd.prog.mk <http://bsd.prog.mk>>; as usual hence does not apply. Look
>     > reasonable approach ?
> 
>     I think I understand what you mean.  But I think PIE is commonplace
>     nowadays and I don't understand what you win by not enabling it for
>     the whole system.  Is it a performance concern?  Is it to preserve
>     conservative minds from to much change? :)
> 
> 
> Looping in Kostik, Bryan Drewery, the PaX team, Hunger, and Sean Bruno.
> 
> On i386, there is a performance cost due to not having an extra register
> available for the relocation work that has to happen. PIE doesn't carry
> much of a performance penalty on amd64, though it still does carry some
> on first resolution of functions (due to the extra relocation step the
> RTLD has to worry about). On amd64, after symbol resolution has taken
> place, there is no further performance penalty due to amd64 having an
> extra register to use for PIE/PIC. I'm unsure what, if any, performance
> penalty PIE carries on ARM, AArch64, and sparc64.
> 

I think if the performance impact can be well understood on all
architectures, and that it is not more than a few % points, other people
may be more willing to enable it on all. I can't speak for them, but if
the impact is not significant then it is safer and simpler to enable
everywhere and I would think that argument would win over anything else.
What do I know though? That approach failed already.

> Certain folk would prefer to see PIE enabled only in certain
> applications. /bin/ls can't really make much use of PIE. But sshd can. I
> personally would like to see all of base's applications compiled as
> PIEs, but that's a long ways off. It took OpenBSD several years to
> accomplish that. Having certain high-visibility applications (like sshd,
> inetd, etc) is a great start. Providing a framework for application
> developers to opt their application into PIE is another great start.
> 
> Those are my two cents.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Shawn 


-- 
Regards,
Bryan Drewery


[-- Attachment #2 --]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (MingW32)

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJUQEifAAoJEDXXcbtuRpfPGpcH/i2FCR+S5iFns4VqxcxupJRB
Fx5Me/j1l8WPOIjnsCDAa6Ojz178YuaTl7SCAPSrCG7+NE0X1XpSmeqMXzx4TSZu
IbxgMVQnHrgR0Wde02l0chStIRBPZs8RrOis8QvfrRtWKelSLe1swkSNguAR4onE
xD6XpbOsM5/Kl1lwde9WAkL0/20vjuChl5k0FHEJNWifImiwz+5t5/NRpxYKX8en
dph8Ownh0Iskp1Wl/2qVh7yOtl5rcOqKrSGb0+WPxfjowXMVx6C91xKQtmqLxaAg
GFVArVU3hsWjxzrxhgLD2K/M4OJXy6Iy8/Jkr0pY/dDlqy/2T3iTWBCF5yiVMPA=
=/Lxy
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
help

Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?5440489F.3080602>