logging _rtld errors
peterjeremy at acm.org
Tue Dec 20 00:44:14 UTC 2011
On 2011-Dec-19 22:01:04 +0200, Kostik Belousov <kostikbel at gmail.com> wrote:
>On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 11:54:46AM -0800, Xin LI wrote:
>> It doesn't seem to me that this proposed change would do something
>> with security?
rtld is a fairly critical part of FreeBSD infrastructure and there
have been several instances where rtld changes have resulted in
>I also think that UTRACE part is not bad, but will object against the
Could you please explain your objections to the LD_PRINT_ERROR part as
I don't see an immediate problem with them.
> FWIW, it should use rtld_printf() instead of printf(),
>but this is moot point.
On 2011-Dec-19 21:02:49 +0100, Clément Lecigne <clemun at gmail.com> wrote:
>Dont know but the ld_printerror != '\0' in the patch should be
>*ld_printerror != '\0', no?
Oops, my mistake. Yes, there is a missing '*'.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 196 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-security/attachments/20111220/447f7af5/attachment.pgp
More information about the freebsd-security