public inbox for glibc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "stsp at users dot sourceforge.net" <sourceware-bugzilla@sourceware.org>
To: glibc-bugs@sourceware.org
Subject: [Bug dynamic-link/30134] DT_AUDIT is ignored for dlopen()ed solib
Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2023 07:28:39 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-30134-131-ErkrHn9B6v@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-30134-131@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/>

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30134

--- Comment #17 from Stas Sergeev <stsp at users dot sourceforge.net> ---
Ah, I see your point.
So basically you mean, while DT_AUDIT
can well be supported for dlopen() right
now, it may be slightly inconsistent with
la_premap, as it would just skip it.

Well, for my use-case this is definitely
not a problem because my use-case is only
applying auditing to dlmem(), not dlopen().
dlmem() is done later by the dlopen()'ed
plugin. So for my case its perfectly fine.

Whether it is a generic consistency problem
or not, is hard to tell, as currently there
is no la_premap so we can't take a look at
how dl_main() would have supported it, be
it there. :) But I do share your concern,
especially since there was once that
LD_PREFER_MAP_32BIT_EXE thing that likely
didn't skip any objects. So if we are
modelling that, then la_premap is something
to think about for the implementer of
DT_AUDIT support for dlopen().

But please note one more thing.
I started dlload_audit_module() exactly
because I am not a big believer in DT_AUDIT
for dlopen(). DT_AUDIT for dlopen() is just
an "escape" scenario. So maybe if we get
dlload_audit_module() in, we can just close
this?

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.

  parent reply	other threads:[~2023-02-27  7:28 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-02-17 16:50 [Bug dynamic-link/30134] New: " stsp at users dot sourceforge.net
2023-02-17 19:48 ` [Bug dynamic-link/30134] " fweimer at redhat dot com
2023-02-18  1:17 ` stsp at users dot sourceforge.net
2023-02-18  1:44 ` stsp at users dot sourceforge.net
2023-02-20 11:00 ` fweimer at redhat dot com
2023-02-20 11:50 ` stsp at users dot sourceforge.net
2023-02-20 12:15 ` fweimer at redhat dot com
2023-02-20 12:56 ` stsp at users dot sourceforge.net
2023-02-23 15:58 ` janderson at rice dot edu
2023-02-23 16:02 ` stsp at users dot sourceforge.net
2023-02-26 16:00 ` janderson at rice dot edu
2023-02-26 16:12 ` stsp at users dot sourceforge.net
2023-02-26 16:55 ` janderson at rice dot edu
2023-02-26 17:09 ` stsp at users dot sourceforge.net
2023-02-26 21:45 ` janderson at rice dot edu
2023-02-27  6:03 ` stsp at users dot sourceforge.net
2023-02-27  6:57 ` janderson at rice dot edu
2023-02-27  7:28 ` stsp at users dot sourceforge.net [this message]
2023-02-27  8:16 ` stsp at users dot sourceforge.net
2023-02-27  8:27 ` stsp at users dot sourceforge.net

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-30134-131-ErkrHn9B6v@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/ \
    --to=sourceware-bugzilla@sourceware.org \
    --cc=glibc-bugs@sourceware.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: link
Be 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).