diff mbox

[01/12] Configury support for --enable-stack-protector.

Message ID 87lh6fo236.fsf@esperi.org.uk
State New, archived
Headers show

Commit Message

Nix Feb. 20, 2016, 3:04 p.m. UTC
On 20 Feb 2016, Andreas Schwab outgrape:

> Nix <nix@esperi.org.uk> writes:
>
>> +AC_ARG_ENABLE([stack-protector],
>> +            AC_HELP_STRING([--enable-stack-protector=@<:@yes|no|all|strong@:>@],
>> +                           [Detect stack overflows in glibc functions with large string buffers, or in all glibc functions]),
>
> Please explain the meaning of the argument in the help string.

OK, so this is a bit long in the output:

  --enable-stack-protector=[yes|no|all|strong]
                          Detect stack overflows in glibc functions, either
                          with local buffers (yes), or with those plus arrays
                          (strong), or all functions (all)

but it does what you asked for, I think.  Adjusted patch below.  (The
line in configure.ac is rather long, but I don't think that line is
breakable easily.)

---------------- >8 ----------------
From: Nick Alcock <nick.alcock@oracle.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2016 17:25:05 +0000
Subject: [PATCH] Configury support for --enable-stack-protector.

This adds =all and =strong, with obvious semantics, and with a rather
arbitrarily-chosen default off, which we might well want to change to
something stronger once this patch has been tested by people other than
me.

We don't validate the value of the option yet: that's in a later patch.
Nor do we use it for anything at this stage.

We differentiate between 'the compiler understands -fstack-protector'
and 'the user wanted -fstack-protector' so that we can pass
-fno-stack-protector in appropriate places even if the user didn't want
to turn on -fstack-protector for other parts.  (This helps us overcome
another existing limitation, that glibc doesn't work with GCC's hacked
to pass in -fstack-protector by default.)

We might want to add another configuration option to turn on
-fstack-protector for nscd and other network-facing operations by
default, but for now I've stuck with one option to control everything.
---
 configure.ac | 61 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------------
 1 file changed, 41 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
diff mbox

Patch

diff --git a/configure.ac b/configure.ac
index 3c766b7..61bf882 100644
--- a/configure.ac
+++ b/configure.ac
@@ -232,6 +232,18 @@  AC_ARG_ENABLE([bind-now],
 	      [bindnow=no])
 AC_SUBST(bindnow)
 
+dnl Build glibc with -fstack-protector, -fstack-protector-all, or
+dnl -fstack-protector-strong.
+AC_ARG_ENABLE([stack-protector],
+            AC_HELP_STRING([--enable-stack-protector=@<:@yes|no|all|strong@:>@],
+                           [Detect stack overflows in glibc functions, either with local buffers (yes), or with those plus arrays (strong), or all functions (all)]),
+            [enable_stack_protector=$enableval],
+            [enable_stack_protector=no])
+case x"$enable_stack_protector" in
+    xall|xyes|xno|xstrong) ;;
+    *) AC_MSG_ERROR([Not a valid argument for --enable-stack-protector]);;
+esac
+
 dnl On some platforms we cannot use dynamic loading.  We must provide
 dnl static NSS modules.
 AC_ARG_ENABLE([static-nss],
@@ -602,6 +614,35 @@  fi
 test -n "$base_machine" || base_machine=$machine
 AC_SUBST(base_machine)
 
+AC_CACHE_CHECK(for -fstack-protector, libc_cv_ssp, [dnl
+LIBC_TRY_CC_OPTION([$CFLAGS $CPPFLAGS -Werror -fstack-protector],
+		   [libc_cv_ssp=yes],
+		   [libc_cv_ssp=no])
+])
+
+AC_CACHE_CHECK(for -fstack-protector-strong, libc_cv_ssp_strong, [dnl
+LIBC_TRY_CC_OPTION([$CFLAGS $CPPFLAGS -Werror -fstack-protector-strong],
+		   [libc_cv_ssp_strong=yes],
+		   [libc_cv_ssp_strong=no])
+])
+
+AC_CACHE_CHECK(for -fstack-protector-all, libc_cv_ssp_all, [dnl
+LIBC_TRY_CC_OPTION([$CFLAGS $CPPFLAGS -Werror -fstack-protector-all],
+		   [libc_cv_ssp_all=yes],
+		   [libc_cv_ssp_all=no])
+])
+
+stack_protector=
+if test x$enable_stack_protector = xyes && test $libc_cv_ssp = yes; then
+  stack_protector=-fstack-protector
+elif test x$enable_stack_protector = xall && test $libc_cv_ssp_all = yes; then
+  stack_protector=-fstack-protector-all
+elif test x$enable_stack_protector = xstrong && test $libc_cv_ssp_strong = yes; then
+  stack_protector=-fstack-protector-strong
+fi
+AC_SUBST(libc_cv_ssp)
+AC_SUBST(stack_protector)
+
 # For the multi-arch option we need support in the assembler & linker.
 AC_CACHE_CHECK([for assembler and linker STT_GNU_IFUNC support],
 	       libc_cv_ld_gnu_indirect_function, [dnl
@@ -1389,26 +1430,6 @@  else
 fi
 AC_SUBST(fno_unit_at_a_time)
 
-AC_CACHE_CHECK(for -fstack-protector, libc_cv_ssp, [dnl
-LIBC_TRY_CC_OPTION([$CFLAGS $CPPFLAGS -Werror -fstack-protector],
-		   [libc_cv_ssp=yes],
-		   [libc_cv_ssp=no])
-])
-
-AC_CACHE_CHECK(for -fstack-protector-strong, libc_cv_ssp_strong, [dnl
-LIBC_TRY_CC_OPTION([$CFLAGS $CPPFLAGS -Werror -fstack-protector-strong],
-		   [libc_cv_ssp_strong=yes],
-		   [libc_cv_ssp_strong=no])
-])
-
-stack_protector=
-if test "$libc_cv_ssp_strong" = "yes"; then
-  stack_protector="-fstack-protector-strong"
-elif test "$libc_cv_ssp" = "yes"; then
-  stack_protector="-fstack-protector"
-fi
-AC_SUBST(stack_protector)
-
 AC_CACHE_CHECK(whether cc puts quotes around section names,
 	       libc_cv_have_section_quotes,
 	       [cat > conftest.c <<EOF