This is the mail archive of the gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

[Bug sanitizer/87875] Address sanitizer doen't work with nested functions with enabled stack-use-after-return check


https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87875

--- Comment #6 from Martin Liška <marxin at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #5)
> (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #4)
> > Created attachment 44956 [details]
> > Patch candidate
> > 
> > @Jakub: What do you think about the suggested patch? May I attempt to
> > mainline it?
> 
> No, see above, that is not a good idea from security POV.
> You want to do that only if the real stack is executable.
> Dunno whether one should e.g. parse /proc/self/maps and find the stack in
> there, check the protection flags.

I see. So this one should be done at the place where a fake stack is created
(mmapped), right?

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]