[Bug ld/24151] Regression about copy relocation of protected data
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24151 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com Depends on||22791 Referenced Bugs: https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22791 [Bug 22791] PLT32 should be used for 32-bit PC-relative branches -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug gas/22791] PLT32 should be used for 32-bit PC-relative branches
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22791 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||24151 Referenced Bugs: https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24151 [Bug 24151] Regression about copy relocation of protected data -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
Re: How create small binaries with GNU binutils.
On Feb 01 2019, Dmitry Bogatov wrote: > results in huge binary: > > $ du -hb a.out > 4744a.out > $ strip -s a.out > $ du -hb a.out > 4408a.out > $ file a.out > a.out: ELF 64-bit LSB executable, x86-64, version 1 (SYSV), statically > linked, stripped I cannot reproduce that. $ stat -c %s a.out 664 $ strip a.out $ stat -c %s a.out 344 $ size a.out textdata bss dec hex filename 13 0 0 13 d a.out $ rpm -q binutils binutils-2.31.90-lp150.5.68.1.x86_64 Try examining the files with `readelf -a'. Andreas. -- Andreas Schwab, sch...@linux-m68k.org GPG Key fingerprint = 7578 EB47 D4E5 4D69 2510 2552 DF73 E780 A9DA AEC1 "And now for something completely different." ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
How create small binaries with GNU binutils.
[ Not a but, strictly speaking, but just do not know, where else to ask. ] Hello! I like AT&T syntax of amd64 assembler, so I am using GNU As. Unfortunately, it creates binries much bigger then one would expect from source code. For compraison, trivial program, that just exits with value 1 (essentially, /bin/false), implemented in fasm: ;; a02.fasm format ELF64 executable at 0001h segment readable executable entry $ xor edi,edi inc edi mov eax,60 syscall complied in following way $ fasm a02.fasm flat assembler version 1.73.06 (16384 kilobytes memory) 1 passes, 131 bytes. results in tiny binary. Equivalent program, compiled and linked with binutils # a01.S .globl _start _start: xor %di, %di inc %di mov $60, %eax syscall with following commands: as a01.S -o a01.o ld a01.o results in huge binary: $ du -hb a.out 4744a.out $ strip -s a.out $ du -hb a.out 4408a.out $ file a.out a.out: ELF 64-bit LSB executable, x86-64, version 1 (SYSV), statically linked, stripped Both `as` and `ld` are from Debian package `binutils=2.31.1-11`. What am I doing wrong? Can I force binutils to create small, ~150 bytes binary? -- Note, that I send and fetch email in batch, once every 24 hours. If matter is urgent, try https://t.me/kaction -- pgpvu4cQu7dL_.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug binutils/23963] objdump unsafely prints control characters from string table
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23963 --- Comment #6 from Nick Clifton --- (In reply to Ben N from comment #5) Hi Ben, > Thanks Nick. As I couldn't find functionality in objdump that warranted the > printing of control sequences and readelf already mitigate this behaviour, I > believe this to be a security vulnerability. > Can you please let me know your thoughts on this. I would like to apply for > a CVE and to notify pkg maintainers so this patch is backported. I think that you should apply for a CVE. I am not familiar with how control sequences might trigger VTE vulberabilities, but I do see how they could be used to conceal information in objdump's output, which would obviously be bad. Cheers Nick -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug binutils/23963] objdump unsafely prints control characters from string table
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23963 --- Comment #5 from Ben N --- (In reply to Nick Clifton from comment #3) > (In reply to Ben N from comment #1) > Hi Ben, > > Sorry for the delay. I have now applied an extended version of your > patch, which should cover almost all of the symbols displayed by > objdump. There is one place left where this kind of problem might > still arise - the print_section_stabs() function - but I think that > this will do for now. > > Cheers > Nick Thanks Nick. As I couldn't find functionality in objdump that warranted the printing of control sequences and readelf already mitigate this behaviour, I believe this to be a security vulnerability. The premise being, users of objdump assume analysing the binary causes nothing more than information to be displayed to screen. Whereas the affected version allows the undefined treatment of control sequences to be abused to interact with the terminal and in some cases exploit VTE vulnerabilities. Can you please let me know your thoughts on this. I would like to apply for a CVE and to notify pkg maintainers so this patch is backported. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
