linux-kernel - CC_STACKPROTECTOR vs CC_STACKPROTECTOR

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <20090429195453.GE8586@outflux.net>
Date:	Wed, 29 Apr 2009 12:54:53 -0700
From:	Kees Cook <kees@...ntu.com>
To:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Subject: CC_STACKPROTECTOR vs CC_STACKPROTECTOR_ALL

Hi,

What is the rationale for why CC_STACKPROTECTOR_ALL is forced when using
CC_STACKPROTECTOR?  I would have expected _ALL to be a separate option
(as it was in earlier versions), but it seems it is forced on by commit
113c5413cf9051cc50b88befdc42e3402bb92115.

Thanks,

-Kees

-- 
Kees Cook
Ubuntu Security Team
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/