public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug c/68065] Size calculations for VLAs can overflow Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2015 16:35:00 -0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <bug-68065-4-M4CRitv592@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw) In-Reply-To: <bug-68065-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68065 Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #12 from Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org> --- > Stack overflows are detected with -fstack-check, or at least they would be > if the option worked properly: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66479 > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65958 Yes, it works, i.e. it detects stack overflows in real life. The first PR is certainly annoying but largely artificial and the second PR is actually a generic bug in the gimplifier with VLAs and alloca that the old implementation happens to run into; the modern one doesn't. > I've always found it quite bad that well-defined code with GCC can actually > be exploited (arbitrary write vulnerabilities) due to the fact that > -fstack-check is not enabled by default. MSVC++ and Clang on Windows > guarantee that stack overflows from well-defined code (large stack frames, > VLAs) will be caught. Same for GCC on Windows (but it does out-of-line stack checking). > However, the switch seems to cause a significant performance hit for functions > where it triggers (which are rare but sometimes performance critical, a good > example is jemalloc's rbtree implementation which uses arrays rather than > recursion) and compatibility issues due to the way it's currently implemented: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67265/. This one is more of a register allocation issue actually.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-10-28 16:35 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2015-10-23 8:36 [Bug c/68065] New: " ch3root at openwall dot com 2015-10-23 9:22 ` [Bug c/68065] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2015-10-23 16:22 ` joseph at codesourcery dot com 2015-10-27 0:06 ` ch3root at openwall dot com 2015-10-27 0:15 ` joseph at codesourcery dot com 2015-10-27 14:25 ` ch3root at openwall dot com 2015-10-27 17:09 ` joseph at codesourcery dot com 2015-10-27 18:29 ` danielmicay at gmail dot com 2015-10-28 11:28 ` ch3root at openwall dot com 2015-10-28 13:15 ` joseph at codesourcery dot com 2015-10-28 16:35 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org [this message] 2015-10-28 23:30 ` ch3root at openwall dot com 2015-10-28 23:38 ` joseph at codesourcery dot com 2015-10-28 23:43 ` ch3root at openwall dot com
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=bug-68065-4-M4CRitv592@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \ --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \ --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).