public inbox for glibc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [Bug ports/11615] ld.so segfaults when RLD_MAP is 0
[not found] <bug-11615-131@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/>
@ 2012-02-15 22:16 ` jsm28 at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-02-15 22:41 ` aurelien at aurel32 dot net
` (3 subsequent siblings)
4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: jsm28 at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2012-02-15 22:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: glibc-bugs
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11615
Joseph Myers <jsm28 at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |SUSPENDED
AssignedTo|roland at gnu dot org |unassigned at sourceware
| |dot org
--- Comment #2 from Joseph Myers <jsm28 at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-02-15 22:04:41 UTC ---
My impression when I looked at another issue relating to ldd and its use of
ld.so was that ld.so is not expected to do anything sensible with broken
binaries or libraries in any mode, as an architecture-independent matter, and
running with them may involve arbitrary code execution (so you mustn't use
ld.so on possibly hostile code). Maybe we should generically fix this so that
ldd of hostile code is safe, but then you'd also need to allow for arbitrary
values that are not 0 but still involve writing somewhere inappropriate - that
is, somehow check the address for sanity.
--
Configure bugmail: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* [Bug ports/11615] ld.so segfaults when RLD_MAP is 0
[not found] <bug-11615-131@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/>
2012-02-15 22:16 ` [Bug ports/11615] ld.so segfaults when RLD_MAP is 0 jsm28 at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2012-02-15 22:41 ` aurelien at aurel32 dot net
2012-02-15 22:56 ` joseph at codesourcery dot com
` (2 subsequent siblings)
4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: aurelien at aurel32 dot net @ 2012-02-15 22:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: glibc-bugs
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11615
--- Comment #3 from Aurelien Jarno <aurelien at aurel32 dot net> 2012-02-15 22:19:27 UTC ---
Note that the problem is not only with ldd, it also segfaults while calling the
binary. For the record, the original bug report is the following:
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=579917
--
Configure bugmail: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* [Bug ports/11615] ld.so segfaults when RLD_MAP is 0
[not found] <bug-11615-131@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/>
2012-02-15 22:16 ` [Bug ports/11615] ld.so segfaults when RLD_MAP is 0 jsm28 at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-02-15 22:41 ` aurelien at aurel32 dot net
@ 2012-02-15 22:56 ` joseph at codesourcery dot com
2013-10-13 5:48 ` neleai at seznam dot cz
2014-06-30 18:03 ` fweimer at redhat dot com
4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: joseph at codesourcery dot com @ 2012-02-15 22:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: glibc-bugs
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11615
--- Comment #4 from joseph at codesourcery dot com <joseph at codesourcery dot com> 2012-02-15 22:50:56 UTC ---
On Wed, 15 Feb 2012, aurelien at aurel32 dot net wrote:
> Note that the problem is not only with ldd, it also segfaults while
> calling the binary. For the record, the original bug report is the
> following:
Segfaulting while calling invalid binaries is certainly to be expected
(there's no way you can sensibly expect to execute them safely, at most
you might detect some conditions and give an error message), whereas you
can argue that ldd should handle them safely. The binutils bug creating
such binaries has been fixed:
http://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2011-12/msg00112.html
--
Configure bugmail: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* [Bug ports/11615] ld.so segfaults when RLD_MAP is 0
[not found] <bug-11615-131@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/>
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2012-02-15 22:56 ` joseph at codesourcery dot com
@ 2013-10-13 5:48 ` neleai at seznam dot cz
2014-06-30 18:03 ` fweimer at redhat dot com
4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: neleai at seznam dot cz @ 2013-10-13 5:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: glibc-bugs
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11615
Ondrej Bilka <neleai at seznam dot cz> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|SUSPENDED |RESOLVED
CC| |neleai at seznam dot cz
Resolution|--- |WONTFIX
--- Comment #5 from Ondrej Bilka <neleai at seznam dot cz> ---
Closing as binutils were fixed two years ago.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* [Bug ports/11615] ld.so segfaults when RLD_MAP is 0
[not found] <bug-11615-131@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/>
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2013-10-13 5:48 ` neleai at seznam dot cz
@ 2014-06-30 18:03 ` fweimer at redhat dot com
4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: fweimer at redhat dot com @ 2014-06-30 18:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: glibc-bugs
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11615
Florian Weimer <fweimer at redhat dot com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flags| |security-
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [Bug ports/11615] New: ld.so segfaults when RLD_MAP is 0
@ 2010-05-20 12:51 aurelien at aurel32 dot net
2010-05-20 12:52 ` [Bug ports/11615] " aurelien at aurel32 dot net
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: aurelien at aurel32 dot net @ 2010-05-20 12:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: glibc-bugs
Broken ELF binaries that have RLD_MAP equals to 0 (it seems to be possible to
generate them linking it with --version-script) are causing a segfault of ld.so,
even in --list or --verify mode. While this is obviously a bug in the ELF
binary, ld.so should not segfault in this case.
--
Summary: ld.so segfaults when RLD_MAP is 0
Product: glibc
Version: unspecified
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: ports
AssignedTo: roland at gnu dot org
ReportedBy: aurelien at aurel32 dot net
CC: glibc-bugs at sources dot redhat dot com
GCC build triplet: mipsel-unknown-linux-gnu
GCC host triplet: mipsel-unknown-linux-gnu
GCC target triplet: mipsel-unknown-linux-gnu
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11615
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2014-06-30 18:03 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <bug-11615-131@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/>
2012-02-15 22:16 ` [Bug ports/11615] ld.so segfaults when RLD_MAP is 0 jsm28 at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-02-15 22:41 ` aurelien at aurel32 dot net
2012-02-15 22:56 ` joseph at codesourcery dot com
2013-10-13 5:48 ` neleai at seznam dot cz
2014-06-30 18:03 ` fweimer at redhat dot com
2010-05-20 12:51 [Bug ports/11615] New: " aurelien at aurel32 dot net
2010-05-20 12:52 ` [Bug ports/11615] " aurelien at aurel32 dot net
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).