Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.user > #184943 > unrolled thread

Re: When did Debian decide to enable PIE by default?

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.user

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: When did Debian decide to enable PIE by default? "Thomas Schmitt" <scdbackup@gmx.net> - 2017-08-09 18:50 +0200
    Re: When did Debian decide to enable PIE by default? Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2017-08-10 02:50 +0200
      Re: When did Debian decide to enable PIE by default? Joe <joe@jretrading.com> - 2017-08-10 09:30 +0200

#184943 — Re: When did Debian decide to enable PIE by default?

Hi,

Gene Heskett wrote:
> > what the heck is PIE?

Dan Ritter and others wrote:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Position-independent_code

It seems to have caused only moderate trouble.
Insofar it did not cause such a spectacular echo as other novelties and
strategic decisions.


慕 冬亮 <mudongliangabcd@hotmail.com> wrote:
> why does Debian enable PIE by default, other 
> than stack protector and FORTIFY_SOURCE that are already enabled by 
> default in the Ubuntu distribution?

All i know is what i learned during research for the question a few days
ago, why Debian 9 was slower than Debian 8:
  https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2017/08/msg00051.html
(It would be nice to learn if any new insight came to Alexandru Iancu.)

If there remain particular technical questions after following all links
and some sub-links of
  https://wiki.debian.org/Hardening/PIEByDefaultTransition
i would possibly ask on debian-devel mailing list, whether there is more
info available about the motivation and constraints of Debian's decision.


Have a nice day :)

Thomas

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#184962

On Wednesday 09 August 2017 12:43:14 Thomas Schmitt wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Gene Heskett wrote:
> > > what the heck is PIE?
>
> Dan Ritter and others wrote:
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Position-independent_code
>
> It seems to have caused only moderate trouble.
> Insofar it did not cause such a spectacular echo as other novelties
> and strategic decisions.
>
> 慕 冬亮 <mudongliangabcd@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > why does Debian enable PIE by default, other
> > than stack protector and FORTIFY_SOURCE that are already enabled by
> > default in the Ubuntu distribution?
>
> All i know is what i learned during research for the question a few
> days ago, why Debian 9 was slower than Debian 8:
>   https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2017/08/msg00051.html
> (It would be nice to learn if any new insight came to Alexandru
> Iancu.)
>
> If there remain particular technical questions after following all
> links and some sub-links of
>   https://wiki.debian.org/Hardening/PIEByDefaultTransition
> i would possibly ask on debian-devel mailing list, whether there is
> more info available about the motivation and constraints of Debian's
> decision.
>
It is NOT a new invention by any means. Motorola's micro-processor in the 
first TRS-80 Color Computer, the MC6809E in the early 1980's was built 
with that in mind.  And I've been writing assembly code that used it 
ever since.

So its only new to the wintel scene. :)  I assume moto's patents had to 
expire before anybody else could use it.  Although, moto did allow 
Hitachi to "clone it' in cmos, but Hitachi had to promise to never, ever 
admit it was anything but a clone. But Hitachi had some pretty clever 
people, so the various nooks and cranny's in the instruction map that 
were blank in the motorola version, were filled in, making it 
considerably more orthogonal, and despite having an 8 bit data bus, 
actually has some 32 bit operations, like a 16 bit into 32 bit divide in 
39 clocks maximum.  Or a 16x16 bit mull in 25 clocks.  Taking full 
advantage of all that, the formerly called os9 operating system, now 
community maintained as Nitros9, is about 150% faster at the same clock 
speed as that same socket was driven at in the 1983 or 84 time frame. I 
had a hand in converting one of its code modules myself.

> Have a nice day :)
>
> Thomas


Cheers, Gene Heskett
-- 
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#184973

On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 20:45:06 -0400
Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> wrote:


> >  
> It is NOT a new invention by any means. Motorola's micro-processor in
> the first TRS-80 Color Computer, the MC6809E in the early 1980's was
> built with that in mind.  And I've been writing assembly code that
> used it ever since.
> 
> So its only new to the wintel scene. :)  I assume moto's patents had
> to expire before anybody else could use it.

And it wasn't new to microprocessors. The DG Nova was using it rather
earlier, and I assume the PDPs had it. And so on...

http://users.rcn.com/crfriend/museum/doco/DG/Nova/base-instr.html

-- 
Joe

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.user

csiph-web