From owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Thu Mar 9 15:45:54 2017 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 09983D05685 for ; Thu, 9 Mar 2017 15:45:54 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from citrin+bsd@citrin.ru) Received: from hz.citrin.ru (hz.citrin.ru [88.198.212.3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C5993F07 for ; Thu, 9 Mar 2017 15:45:53 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from citrin+bsd@citrin.ru) Received: from x220.lan (unknown [IPv6:2601:18a:c301:8eee:9a6:c76b:7d:95c0]) by hz.citrin.ru (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2E48E29A630 for ; Thu, 9 Mar 2017 15:45:51 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: security.bsd.stack_guard_page To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org References: From: Anton Yuzhaninov Message-ID: Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2017 10:45:49 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=citrin.ru; s=s0; t=1489074351; bh=LqsjJP4AaGRnN9oSBwDnZqPAclsdt8gNYZ7o2Ev0t/M=; h=Subject:To:References:From:Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:In-Reply-To:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=CYGETj52NTjFUCUNjwD1tyD07rjdWjsH73ZLje7EErIF/m7zs5e/bM3aigNrJLt3s//ZXaVe6nNM3DKnvHxFY2Ez3nrgfPUeD3jwv24f1iskfQF3AdcXjbmpo51gLbixvfj40wb1+AUAFnPTWX1VgHYOJHlsQo13cSKURwPnhiQ= X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2017 15:45:54 -0000 On 03/09/17 10:26, Andrea Venturoli wrote: > Any doc on this sysctl? It seems to be only docs available are sysctl description and commit message: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/215307 > I think I get the overall picture on what it does, but I'd like to > understand whether there are donwsides on enabling this. > Like... system running slower or consuming more RAM... incompatible > ports or drivers... etc. > > Any reason not to enable it? Id don't know for sure, but probably this feature adds a little value given that SSP (stack smashing protection) is already enabled for base system and most of ports. If you need definitive answer, try to ask author of this feature (kib@).