From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca by simark.ca with LMTP id 0dDdM+2tOWRC5SsAWB0awg (envelope-from ) for ; Fri, 14 Apr 2023 15:47:57 -0400 Received: by simark.ca (Postfix, from userid 112) id C29EE1E221; Fri, 14 Apr 2023 15:47:57 -0400 (EDT) Authentication-Results: simark.ca; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; secure) header.d=sourceware.org header.i=@sourceware.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=default header.b=j3gJaJAH; dkim-atps=neutral X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on simark.ca X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, RDNS_DYNAMIC,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 Received: from sourceware.org (ip-8-43-85-97.sourceware.org [8.43.85.97]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5BBAD1E0D3 for ; Fri, 14 Apr 2023 15:47:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D5713858C3A for ; Fri, 14 Apr 2023 19:47:55 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 6D5713858C3A DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org; s=default; t=1681501675; bh=ioaIXodA6WmaUlamHsuF4PGI9ZUZBrwfEnSvKTq6/WA=; h=To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:Date:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe:From:Reply-To: From; b=j3gJaJAHXuTM/WV8zjofhL+hJclj3ovyp7L/bAOCE3lOuj7zuQLFFpHsi0LCDo2F2 iSqKxCJSUzSbZL3WMPDRS47gXPesPCTDrntW5y6KhWyydoFhYqWtCVmOwdfewZQeB+ +NPrYcaQYfBJIgVmeV3LZAOFKMp6auBww/4537DY= Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 38AC93856DF6 for ; Fri, 14 Apr 2023 19:45:36 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 38AC93856DF6 Received: from mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (mx3-rdu2.redhat.com [66.187.233.73]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-526-krQqbImOPyyM4YumsI2-DA-1; Fri, 14 Apr 2023 15:45:34 -0400 X-MC-Unique: krQqbImOPyyM4YumsI2-DA-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.9]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 68EED381494D; Fri, 14 Apr 2023 19:45:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from greed.delorie.com (unknown [10.22.8.117]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 55C21492C13; Fri, 14 Apr 2023 19:45:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from greed.delorie.com.redhat.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by greed.delorie.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 33EJjXxO3066597; Fri, 14 Apr 2023 15:45:33 -0400 To: Ian Lance Taylor Cc: binutils@sourceware.org, gdb@sourceware.org Subject: Re: RFC: Adding a SECURITY.md document to the Binutils In-Reply-To: Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2023 15:45:33 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.1 on 10.11.54.9 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain X-BeenThere: gdb@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gdb mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , From: DJ Delorie via Gdb Reply-To: DJ Delorie Errors-To: gdb-bounces+public-inbox=simark.ca@sourceware.org Sender: "Gdb" Ian Lance Taylor via Gdb writes: > Compilers and linkers must behave in a reasonable manner when given > untrusted input. Are we confusing trusted with well-behaved? I mean, if I download a source tree from the FSF's git server, I trust it, but it may still be ill-behaved. Meanwhile, sources from a public mailing list may be well-behaved but not trusted. I'm only posting this because Carlos and I had long discussions about this before we set up the glibc pre-commit CI. This process takes random patches from the public glibc mailing list, and builds them. WHOA! That's dangerous! Yes. The patches may produce well-defined code, but are not trusted. Those builds run in a tight sandbox to mitigate any attack attempts. Security here is outside the scope of the build tools. I don't expect gcc to scan for viruses or prevent people from doing "#include ".