On Mon, Oct 16, 2023 at 04:32:02PM +0545, Mike Frysinger wrote: > On 16 Oct 2023 02:19, Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote: > > The binutils security policy[1] states that diagnostic tools should not > > be expected to be safe without sandboxing, so it doesn't make sense to > > recommend it as the alternative to ldd, especially since it is not a > > drop-in replacement. Recommend sandboxing instead, since that is in > > fact the safest known way at the moment to deal with untrusted binaries. > > fwiw, this is one reason why i wrote `lddtree` (although the primary reason > was cross-compiling and separate-root dirs). it's part of the pax-utils > project that's available in most distros now. > -mike Hi Mike, Is there a manual page for lddtree(1)? alx@debian:~$ man lddtree No manual entry for lddtree alx@debian:~$ apt-file show pax-utils pax-utils: /usr/bin/dumpelf pax-utils: /usr/bin/lddtree pax-utils: /usr/bin/pspax pax-utils: /usr/bin/scanelf pax-utils: /usr/bin/scanmacho pax-utils: /usr/bin/symtree pax-utils: /usr/share/doc/pax-utils/changelog.Debian.gz pax-utils: /usr/share/doc/pax-utils/copyright pax-utils: /usr/share/man/man1/dumpelf.1.gz pax-utils: /usr/share/man/man1/pspax.1.gz pax-utils: /usr/share/man/man1/scanelf.1.gz pax-utils: /usr/share/man/man1/scanmacho.1.gz Would you mind pointing to some documentation for it? Or write a page if you feel like. :) Cheers, Alex -- <https://www.alejandro-colomar.es/>
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
