Re: gcj-security and some issues

[Bryce McKinlay <mckinlay at redhat dot com>]

Andrew Haley wrote:

> > Well, you'd think so, but this is the reason why my patch is taking so 
> > long - it becomes complicated because of the Linker/PLT messing function 
> > pointers up.
>
> Right, but the unwinder we have already does basically the same thing
> and it's fine except for native methods, which are outside the sandbox
> anyway.

Its also broken for non-native static methods which are in a shared 
library and called directly from the application binary. Perhaps the 
fallback lookups that the current implementation does cover this up, though.

Regards

Bryce.