4 ms·

Can anyone actually get this to compile? I failed last year, and it's still failing: $ CFLAGS=-fPIC make clean all rm -f *.o injector cc -fPIC -c i

Can anyone actually get this to compile? I failed last year, and it's still failing: $ CFLAGS=-fPIC make clean all rm -f *.o injector cc -fPIC -c injector.c -o injector.o -Wall injector.c:321:93: warning: excess elements in array initializer .start={.bytes={0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00}, .len=0}, ^~~~ injector.c:321:93: note: (near initialization for ‘total_range.start.bytes’) injector.c:322:91: warning: excess elements in array initializer .end={.bytes={0xff,0xff,0xff,0xff,0xff,0xff,0xff,0xff,0xff,0xff,0xff,0xff,0xff,0xff,0xff,0xff}, .len=0}, ^~~~ injector.c:322:91: note: (near initialization for ‘total_range.end.bytes’) injector.c: In function ‘inject’: injector.c:778:2: warning: asm operand 15 probably doesn’t match constraints __asm__ __volatile__ ("\ ^~~~~~~ injector.c:778:2: error: impossible constraint in ‘asm’ make: *** [Makefile:38: injector.o] Error 1 2

rgovostes 8y ago
Seems like using immediate values in inline assembly operands can be fragile depending on what optimizations the compiler decides to apply. Try building with -ftree-ter in your CFLAGS, as suggested by https://stackoverflow.com/a/11518308 https://stackoverflow.com/a/11518308
- infinity0 8y ago
  I figured it out, it's because Debian enables PIE and that somehow causes GCC not to be able to satisfy its own rules for allowing inline-assembly to modify %rsp to the value required by this program.
  - rgovostes 8y ago
    You ought to update your pull request, then! I'm not sure why they don't accept regular issues.
    - sabas123 8y ago
      Because this github release was only for talk and he has since moved on (albeit is still using it for other projects) The sifter isn't terrible intresting it self but could use a lot of chances. Like the ability to use multiple disassemblers. God that was such a pain to hack that one together.
  - vectorEQ 8y ago
    for these kind of low level things, it's best to turn off all compiler optimizations and os specific features. if you run gcc -V or something hten it will dump it's default flags for the distro you are on. What i ususally do is create a cross compiler with nothing enabled for these kinds of projects. This saves a lot of sifting and disabling options and optimizations. If you have a bunch of inline assembly and such things, optimizations can be really killing.
iammyIP 8y ago
works when compiled with -no-pie on xubuntu 18.04

rgovostes 8y ago

Seems like using immediate values in inline assembly operands can be fragile depending on what optimizations the compiler decides to apply. Try building with -ftree-ter in your CFLAGS, as suggested by https://stackoverflow.com/a/11518308 https://stackoverflow.com/a/11518308

infinity0 8y ago
I figured it out, it's because Debian enables PIE and that somehow causes GCC not to be able to satisfy its own rules for allowing inline-assembly to modify %rsp to the value required by this program.
- rgovostes 8y ago
  You ought to update your pull request, then! I'm not sure why they don't accept regular issues.
  - sabas123 8y ago
    Because this github release was only for talk and he has since moved on (albeit is still using it for other projects) The sifter isn't terrible intresting it self but could use a lot of chances. Like the ability to use multiple disassemblers. God that was such a pain to hack that one together.
- vectorEQ 8y ago
  for these kind of low level things, it's best to turn off all compiler optimizations and os specific features. if you run gcc -V or something hten it will dump it's default flags for the distro you are on. What i ususally do is create a cross compiler with nothing enabled for these kinds of projects. This saves a lot of sifting and disabling options and optimizations. If you have a bunch of inline assembly and such things, optimizations can be really killing.

iammyIP 8y ago

works when compiled with -no-pie on xubuntu 18.04