Re: Question regarding crunchgen(1) binaries

Shawn Webb <shawn.webb@hardenedbsd.org> wrote:

> 1. Enhance crunchgen(1) to support libc built with LTO.
> 2. Kick crunchgen(1) to the curb.
> 3. Other ideas from the community are possible.
>
> Does anyone find crunchgen(1) to be truly useful in 2024? If we kick
> crunchgen(1) to the curb, we need to modify the build system for
> /rescue binaries.

Please note, my response is not considering the security aspects you raise,
and is only based on the usefulness of /rescue itself.

Do you mean get rid of /rescue, or just getting rid of crunchgen producing
it?

I've been "rescued" by rescue on more than one location - usually systems
that won't mount /usr and also have a screwed up lib.

I wouldn't want to see a static /rescue disappear, and the size would probably
be too large for individual binaries.

Cheers, Jamie