I saw the caveat in the thesis about the trusted compiler-compiler only
needing to be trusted to compile the 1st full compiler. However, I am at a
loss to see how this trusted compiler (i.e. you inspected all possible relevant
source, or you wrote it) is different from Thompson's trusted compiler ("write
it yourself", see quote above).
Your approach still rests in complete trust in one compiler, according to your
See my other comment about how viruses have advanced from Thompson's
original attack, meaning that a subverted original compiler-compiler could
surely infect all other binaries ever touched by that code through, say, ELF
infections and hooking library calls.
Anyway, I'll leave it there.
Copyright © 2017, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds