Re: [gentoo-dev] Improve the security of the default profile

2013-09-05 Thread Rich Freeman
On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 7:09 AM, Tom Wijsman wrote: > On Thu, 05 Sep 2013 12:54:27 +0200 > Agostino Sarubbo wrote: > >> On Thursday 05 September 2013 12:47:01 Tom Wijsman wrote: >> > What I wonder about here is at which cost this does come, when >> > looking at the fstack-protector then I see that

Re: [gentoo-dev] Improve the security of the default profile

2013-09-05 Thread Tom Wijsman
On Thu, 5 Sep 2013 13:09:51 +0100 Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Thu, 05 Sep 2013 12:13:28 +0200 > Agostino Sarubbo wrote: > > during an irc debate, me and other people just noticed that the > > default profile could use more flags to enhance the security. > > > > An hint is here: > > https://wiki

Re: [gentoo-dev] Improve the security of the default profile

2013-09-05 Thread Ciaran McCreesh
On Thu, 05 Sep 2013 12:13:28 +0200 Agostino Sarubbo wrote: > during an irc debate, me and other people just noticed that the > default profile could use more flags to enhance the security. > > An hint is here: > https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ToolChain/CompilerFlags > > Please argue about what we _don'

Re: [gentoo-dev] Improve the security of the default profile

2013-09-05 Thread Agostino Sarubbo
On Thursday 05 September 2013 13:09:00 Tom Wijsman wrote: > Yes, I am aware of that, I am not saying it is unknown; but I am > wondering about those questions: What kind of overhead does this cause? At the first look I don't see anything wrong. > Do you intend to discuss that flag or more generall

Re: [gentoo-dev] Improve the security of the default profile

2013-09-05 Thread Tom Wijsman
On Thu, 05 Sep 2013 12:54:27 +0200 Agostino Sarubbo wrote: > On Thursday 05 September 2013 12:47:01 Tom Wijsman wrote: > > What I wonder about here is at which cost this does come, when > > looking at the fstack-protector then I see that it "emits extra > > code"; so, now the question is what kin

[gentoo-dev] Re: Improve the security of the default profile

2013-09-05 Thread Mike Frysinger
On Thursday 05 September 2013 06:13:28 Agostino Sarubbo wrote: > during an irc debate, me and other people just noticed that the default > profile could use more flags to enhance the security. > > An hint is here: > https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ToolChain/CompilerFlags > > Please argue about what we _d

Re: [gentoo-dev] Improve the security of the default profile

2013-09-05 Thread Sergey Popov
05.09.2013 14:47, Tom Wijsman пишет: > On Thu, 05 Sep 2013 12:13:28 +0200 > Agostino Sarubbo wrote: > >> Hello, >> >> during an irc debate, me and other people just noticed that the >> default profile could use more flags to enhance the security. >> >> An hint is here: >> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/

Re: [gentoo-dev] Improve the security of the default profile

2013-09-05 Thread Agostino Sarubbo
On Thursday 05 September 2013 12:47:01 Tom Wijsman wrote: > What I wonder about here is at which cost this does come, when looking > at the fstack-protector then I see that it "emits extra code"; so, now > the question is what kind of overhead this causes. We use -fstack-protector-all in the harde

Re: [gentoo-dev] Improve the security of the default profile

2013-09-05 Thread Tom Wijsman
On Thu, 05 Sep 2013 12:13:28 +0200 Agostino Sarubbo wrote: > Hello, > > during an irc debate, me and other people just noticed that the > default profile could use more flags to enhance the security. > > An hint is here: > https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ToolChain/CompilerFlags > > Please argue about

[gentoo-dev] Improve the security of the default profile

2013-09-05 Thread Agostino Sarubbo
Hello, during an irc debate, me and other people just noticed that the default profile could use more flags to enhance the security. An hint is here: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ToolChain/CompilerFlags Please argue about what we _don't_ use. Note: please CC me in your response. -- Agostino Sarubb

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Can we have process names and stdout / stderr indication to more efficiently parse build logs? (was: Re: rfc: escape sequences in logs)

2013-09-05 Thread Tom Wijsman
On Thu, 5 Sep 2013 04:54:46 + (UTC) Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote: > Kent Fredric posted on Wed, 04 Sep 2013 23:38:40 +1200 as excerpted: > > > I see. I have a few gvim instances also reading/writing to that > > terminal I didn't know about, interesting. > > Which brings up the privacy