https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29956
--- Comment #3 from Nick Clifton <nickc at redhat dot com> --- (In reply to Mike Frysinger from comment #2) > is the RWX check useful for ELF (bare-metal) targets in general ? Eh - it is debatable. On the one hand, any RWX segment is a potential weak point that attackers might try to exploit, and programs running on bare metal may still need to be security aware. On the other hand, if you are building a bare metal based system then presumably you know what you are doing and what the potential vulnerabilities are likely to be. I do not think that the linker can make a judgement call on this. It is up to the programmers and toolchain creators to decide what is best. There are linker command line options to disable the warnings, and binutils configure options to change the default behaviour, so things can be customized. But correctly identifying "safe" bare metal configurations vs "vulnerable" bare metal configurations ? This is something that the linker cannot do. Overall I think that it is better that the linker defaults to generating these warnings, and having discussions like this one, than to have the linker default to ignoring the issue and someone not realizing that there is a potential problem. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
