linux-hardening - Re: [RFC] gcc-plugins patch for compiler versioning.

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <202509251701.0CC2424@keescook>
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2025 17:03:27 -0700
From: Kees Cook <kees@...nel.org>
To: "Hill, Steven " <steven.hill@...lins.com>
Cc: "linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org" <linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org>,
	Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] gcc-plugins patch for compiler versioning.

On Thu, Sep 25, 2025 at 05:00:35PM +0000, Hill, Steven  wrote:
> Hello.
> 
> Would like to have comments on the attached patch. There could be another
> option for checking both gcc and glibc versions. Just wanted comments before
> doing anything further. I am not on the mailing list, so please CC: on any
> replies. Thank you.
> 
> -Steve
> 
> 
> From b1ac0805d70aaa2e1500a071f63c88bcaa76754e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: "Steven J. Hill" <steven.hill@...lins.com>
> Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2025 18:21:09 -0500
> Subject: [PATCH] gcc-plugins: Relax constraints on plugin compatibility.
> 
> The compatibility check for gcc plugins is too inflexible,
> and a lot of times wrong. Add ability to let the user choose
> how stringent compatibility is.

Why is it wrong a lot? I'm not sure I understand what problem is being
solved here?

-Kees

-- 
Kees Cook