undefined | Better HN

0 pointsedwintorok3y ago0 comments

Can the stage1 wasm binary be reproduced by the stage2 or stage3 executable? Aside from a "trusting trust" type of attack that seems fine, and every modern distro relies on some bootstrap binary for C compilers anyway (usually older versions of them), so it wouldn't be that much different of a bootstrapping problem than bootstrapping GCC itself. (See the GNU Mes project which attempts to bootstrap from just a very small hex interpreter)

0 comments

2 comments · 1 top-level

Arnavion3y ago· 1 in thread

>Can the stage1 wasm binary be reproduced by the stage2 or stage3 executable?

Yes, per (2) in https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33915480

>and every modern distro relies on some bootstrap binary for C compilers anyway (usually older versions of them), so it wouldn't be that much different of a bootstrapping problem than bootstrapping GCC itself.

Yes, that's exactly my point. The zig-wasm-bootstrap package could just be a Build-Depends of the zig package.

melony3y ago

But because of trusting trust, we cannot prove the security of the blob.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse