Stabilize -Zstack-protector as -Cstack-protector

I propose stabilizing `-Cstack-protector` as `-Zstack-protector`. This PR adds a new `-Cstack-protector` flag, leaving the unstable `-Z` flag as is to ease the transition period. The `-Z` flag will be removed in the future.

No RFC/MCP, this flag was added in rust-lang#84197 and was not deemed large enough to require additional process.

The tracking issue for this feature is rust-lang#114903.

The `-Cstack-protector=strong` mode uses the same underlying heuristics as Clang's `-fstack-protector-strong`.
These heuristics weren't designed for Rust, and may be over-conservative in some cases - for example, if
Rust stores a field's data in an alloca using an LLVM array type, LLVM regard the alloca as meaning
that the function has a C array, and enable stack overflow canaries even if the function accesses
the alloca in a safe way. Some people thought we should wait on stabilization until there are better
heuristics, but I didn't hear about any concrete case where this unduly harms performance, and I think
that when a need comes, we can improve the heuristics in LLVM after stabilization.

The heuristics do seem to not be under-conservative, so this should not be a security risk.

The `-Cstack-protector=basic` mode (`-fstack-protector`) uses heuristics that are specifically designed
to catch old-C-style string manipulation. This is not a good fit to Rust, which does not perform much
unsafe C-style string manipulation. As far as I can tell, nobody has been asking for it,
and few people are using it even in today's C - modern distros (e.g. [Debian]) tend to use
`-fstack-protector-strong`.

Therefore, `-Cstack-protector=basic` has been **removed**. If anyone is interested in it, they
are welcome to add it back as an unstable option.

[Debian]: https://wiki.debian.org/Hardening#DEB_BUILD_HARDENING_STACKPROTECTOR_.28gcc.2Fg.2B-.2B-_-fstack-protector-strong.29

Most implementation was done in <rust-lang#84197>. The command-line
attribute enables the relevant LLVM attribute on all functions in
<https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/68baa87ba6f03f8b6af2a368690161f1601e4040/compiler/rustc_codegen_llvm/src/attributes.rs#L267-L276>.

Each target can indicate that it does not support stack canaries - currently,
the GPU platforms `nvptx64-nvidia-cuda` and `amdgcn-amd-amdhsa`. On these
platforms, use of `-Cstack-protector` causes an error.

The feature has tests that make sure that the LLVM heuristic gives reasonable
results for several functions, by checking for `__security_check_cookie` (on Windows)
or `__stack_chk_fail` (on Linux). See
<https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/tree/68baa87ba6f03f8b6af2a368690161f1601e4040/tests/assembly-llvm/stack-protector>

No call-for-testing has been conducted, but the feature seems to be in use.

No reported bugs seem to exist.

- @bbjornse was the original implementor at rust-lang#84197
- @mrcnski documented it at rust-lang#111722
- @wesleywiser added tests for Windows at rust-lang#116037
- @davidtwco worked on the feature at rust-lang#121742
- @nikic provided support from the LLVM side (on Zulip on <https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/channel/233931-t-compiler.2Fmajor-changes/topic/Proposal.20for.20Adapt.20Stack.20Protector.20for.20Ru.E2.80.A6.20compiler-team.23841> and elsewhere),
  thanks @nikic!

No FIXMEs related to this feature.

This feature cannot cause undefined behavior.

No changes to reference/spec, docs added to the codegen docs as part of the stabilization PR.

No.

None.

No support needed for rustdoc, clippy, rust-analyzer, rustfmt or rustup.

Cargo could expose this as an option in build profiles but I would expect the decision as to what version should be used would
be made for the entire crate graph at build time rather than by individual package authors.

`-C stack-protector` is propagated to C compilers using cc-rs via rust-lang/cc-rs#1550

Author: Ariel Ben-Yehuda

bootstrap.example.toml

@@ -713,7 +713,7 @@
 #rust.frame-pointers = false
 
 # Indicates whether stack protectors should be used
-# via the unstable option `-Zstack-protector`.
+# via `-Cstack-protector`.
 #
 # Valid options are : `none`(default),`basic`,`strong`, or `all`.
 # `strong` and `basic` options may be buggy and are not recommended, see rust-lang/rust#114903.

compiler/rustc_codegen_llvm/src/lib.rs

@@ -282,19 +282,32 @@ impl CodegenBackend for LlvmCodegenBackend {
         Generate stack canaries in all functions.
 
     strong
-        Generate stack canaries in a function if it either:
-        - has a local variable of `[T; N]` type, regardless of `T` and `N`
-        - takes the address of a local variable.
+        Generate stack canaries for all functions, unless the compiler
+        can prove these functions can't be the source of a stack
+        buffer overflow (even in the presence of undefined behavior).
 
-          (Note that a local variable being borrowed is not equivalent to its
-          address being taken: e.g. some borrows may be removed by optimization,
-          while by-value argument passing may be implemented with reference to a
-          local stack variable in the ABI.)
+        This provides the same security guarantees as Clang's
+        `-fstack-protector=strong`.
+
+        The exact rules are unstable and subject to change, but
+        currently, it generates stack protectors for functions that,
+        *post-optimization*, contain either arrays (of any size
+        or type) or address-taken locals.
 
     basic
-        Generate stack canaries in functions with local variables of `[T; N]`
+        Generate stack canaries in functions that are heuristically
+        suspected to contain buffer overflows.
+
+        The heuristic is subject to change, but currently it
+        includes functions with local variables of `[T; N]`
         type, where `T` is byte-sized and `N` >= 8.
 
+        This heuristic originated from C, where it detects
+        functions that allocate a `char buf[N];` buffer on the
+        stack, and are therefore likely to have a stack buffer overflow
+        in the case of a length-calculation error. It is *not* a good
+        heuristic for Rust code.
+
     none
         Do not generate stack canaries.
 "#

compiler/rustc_interface/src/tests.rs

@@ -641,6 +641,7 @@ fn test_codegen_options_tracking_hash() {
     tracked!(relro_level, Some(RelroLevel::Full));
     tracked!(soft_float, true);
     tracked!(split_debuginfo, Some(SplitDebuginfo::Packed));
+    tracked!(stack_protector, StackProtector::All);
     tracked!(symbol_mangling_version, Some(SymbolManglingVersion::V0));
     tracked!(target_cpu, Some(String::from("abc")));
     tracked!(target_feature, String::from("all the features, all of them"));
@@ -871,7 +872,6 @@ fn test_unstable_options_tracking_hash() {
     tracked!(small_data_threshold, Some(16));
     tracked!(split_lto_unit, Some(true));
     tracked!(src_hash_algorithm, Some(SourceFileHashAlgorithm::Sha1));
-    tracked!(stack_protector, StackProtector::All);
     tracked!(teach, true);
     tracked!(thinlto, Some(true));
     tracked!(tiny_const_eval_limit, true);

compiler/rustc_session/messages.ftl

@@ -129,7 +129,7 @@ session_target_requires_unwind_tables = target requires unwind tables, they cann
 
 session_target_small_data_threshold_not_supported = `-Z small-data-threshold` is not supported for target {$target_triple} and will be ignored
 
-session_target_stack_protector_not_supported = `-Z stack-protector={$stack_protector}` is not supported for target {$target_triple} and will be ignored
+session_target_stack_protector_not_supported = `-C stack-protector={$stack_protector}` is not supported for target {$target_triple}
 
 session_unexpected_builtin_cfg = unexpected `--cfg {$cfg}` flag
     .controlled_by = config `{$cfg_name}` is only supposed to be controlled by `{$controlled_by}`

compiler/rustc_session/src/options.rs

@@ -1870,9 +1870,12 @@ pub mod parse {
         true
     }
 
-    pub(crate) fn parse_stack_protector(slot: &mut StackProtector, v: Option<&str>) -> bool {
+    pub(crate) fn parse_stack_protector(
+        slot: &mut Option<StackProtector>,
+        v: Option<&str>,
+    ) -> bool {
         match v.and_then(|s| StackProtector::from_str(s).ok()) {
-            Some(ssp) => *slot = ssp,
+            Some(ssp) => *slot = Some(ssp),
             _ => return false,
         }
         true
@@ -2161,6 +2164,9 @@ options! {
     #[rustc_lint_opt_deny_field_access("use `Session::split_debuginfo` instead of this field")]
     split_debuginfo: Option<SplitDebuginfo> = (None, parse_split_debuginfo, [TRACKED],
         "how to handle split-debuginfo, a platform-specific option"),
+    #[rustc_lint_opt_deny_field_access("use `Session::stack_protector` instead of this field")]
+    stack_protector: Option<StackProtector> = (None, parse_stack_protector, [TRACKED],
+        "control stack smash protection strategy (`rustc --print stack-protector-strategies` for details)"),
     strip: Strip = (Strip::None, parse_strip, [UNTRACKED],
         "tell the linker which information to strip (`none` (default), `debuginfo` or `symbols`)"),
     symbol_mangling_version: Option<SymbolManglingVersion> = (None,
@@ -2635,7 +2641,7 @@ written to standard error output)"),
     src_hash_algorithm: Option<SourceFileHashAlgorithm> = (None, parse_src_file_hash, [TRACKED],
         "hash algorithm of source files in debug info (`md5`, `sha1`, or `sha256`)"),
     #[rustc_lint_opt_deny_field_access("use `Session::stack_protector` instead of this field")]
-    stack_protector: StackProtector = (StackProtector::None, parse_stack_protector, [TRACKED],
+    stack_protector: Option<StackProtector> = (None, parse_stack_protector, [TRACKED],
         "control stack smash protection strategy (`rustc --print stack-protector-strategies` for details)"),
     staticlib_allow_rdylib_deps: bool = (false, parse_bool, [TRACKED],
         "allow staticlibs to have rust dylib dependencies"),

compiler/rustc_session/src/session.rs

@@ -792,11 +792,12 @@ impl Session {
     }
 
     pub fn stack_protector(&self) -> StackProtector {
-        if self.target.options.supports_stack_protector {
-            self.opts.unstable_opts.stack_protector
-        } else {
-            StackProtector::None
-        }
+        // -C stack-protector overwrites -Z stack-protector, default to StackProtector::None
+        self.opts
+            .cg
+            .stack_protector
+            .or(self.opts.unstable_opts.stack_protector)
+            .unwrap_or(StackProtector::None)
     }
 
     pub fn must_emit_unwind_tables(&self) -> bool {
@@ -1334,10 +1335,10 @@ fn validate_commandline_args_with_session_available(sess: &Session) {
         }
     }
 
-    if sess.opts.unstable_opts.stack_protector != StackProtector::None {
+    if sess.stack_protector() != StackProtector::None {
         if !sess.target.options.supports_stack_protector {
-            sess.dcx().emit_warn(errors::StackProtectorNotSupportedForTarget {
-                stack_protector: sess.opts.unstable_opts.stack_protector,
+            sess.dcx().emit_err(errors::StackProtectorNotSupportedForTarget {
+                stack_protector: sess.stack_protector(),
                 target_triple: &sess.opts.target_triple,
             });
         }

src/bootstrap/src/core/builder/cargo.rs

@@ -910,7 +910,7 @@ impl Builder<'_> {
         cargo.env(profile_var("STRIP"), self.config.rust_strip.to_string());
 
         if let Some(stack_protector) = &self.config.rust_stack_protector {
-            rustflags.arg(&format!("-Zstack-protector={stack_protector}"));
+            rustflags.arg(&format!("-Cstack-protector={stack_protector}"));
         }
 
         if !matches!(cmd_kind, Kind::Build | Kind::Check | Kind::Clippy | Kind::Fix) && want_rustdoc

src/doc/rustc/src/codegen-options/index.md

@@ -672,6 +672,34 @@ Note that all three options are supported on Linux and Apple platforms,
 Attempting to use an unsupported option requires using the nightly channel
 with the `-Z unstable-options` flag.
 
+## stack-protector
+
+The option `-C stack-protector` (currently also supported in the
+old style `-Z stack-protector`) controls the generation of
+stack-protector canaries.
+
+This flag controls stack smashing protection strategy.
+
+Supported values for this option are:
+- `none` (default): Disable stack canary generation
+- `basic`: Generate stack canaries in functions that are suspected
+  to have a high chance of containing stack buffer overflows (deprecated).
+- `strong`: Generate stack canaries in all functions, unless the compiler
+  can prove these functions can't be the source of a stack
+  buffer overflow (even in the presence of undefined behavior).
+
+  This provides the same security guarantees as Clang's
+  `-fstack-protector=strong`.
+
+  The exact rules are unstable and subject to change, but
+  currently, it generates stack protectors for functions that,
+  *post-optimization*, contain either arrays (of any size
+  or type) or address-taken locals.
+- `all`: Generate stack canaries in all functions
+
+Stack protectors are not supported on many GPU targets, use of stack
+protectors on these targets is an error.
+
 ## strip
 
 The option `-C strip=val` controls stripping of debuginfo and similar auxiliary

src/doc/rustc/src/exploit-mitigations.md

@@ -62,7 +62,7 @@ equivalent.
 | Stack clashing protection | Yes | Yes | 1.20.0 (2017-08-31) |
 | Read-only relocations and immediate binding | Yes | Yes | 1.21.0 (2017-10-12) |
 | Heap corruption protection | Yes | Yes | 1.32.0 (2019-01-17) (via operating system default or specified allocator) |
-| Stack smashing protection | Yes | No, `-Z stack-protector` | Nightly |
+| Stack smashing protection | Yes | No, `-C stack-protector` | ??? |
 | Forward-edge control flow protection | Yes | No, `-Z sanitizer=cfi` | Nightly |
 | Backward-edge control flow protection (e.g., shadow and safe stack) | Yes | No, `-Z sanitizer=shadow-call-stack,safestack` | Nightly |
 

tests/assembly-llvm/stack-protector/stack-protector-heuristics-effect-windows-32bit.rs

@@ -3,10 +3,10 @@
 //@ only-windows
 //@ only-msvc
 //@ ignore-64bit 64-bit table based SEH has slightly different behaviors than classic SEH
-//@ [all] compile-flags: -Z stack-protector=all
-//@ [strong] compile-flags: -Z stack-protector=strong
-//@ [basic] compile-flags: -Z stack-protector=basic
-//@ [none] compile-flags: -Z stack-protector=none
+//@ [all] compile-flags: -C stack-protector=all
+//@ [strong] compile-flags: -C stack-protector=strong
+//@ [basic] compile-flags: -C stack-protector=basic
+//@ [none] compile-flags: -C stack-protector=none
 //@ compile-flags: -C opt-level=2 -Z merge-functions=disabled
 
 #![crate_type = "lib"]