Google Git
Sign in
boringssl/boringssl/4d6b2f971e456962b70e4e91768caffdb36fe016
commit
4d6b2f971e456962b70e4e91768caffdb36fe016
[log]
author
David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Mon Jun 08 13:43:34 2026 -0400
committer
boringssl-scoped@luci-project-accounts.iam.gserviceaccount.com <boringssl-scoped@luci-project-accounts.iam.gserviceaccount.com>
Tue Jun 09 07:33:20 2026 -0700
tree
bfd0d224ba48180295e25687774f800839e437fb
parent
16391ed176f1ff9c54b86bb9817b5a27801e870a [diff]
delocate: Treat BORINGSSL_bcm_text_hash as a synthesized symbol

Otherwise the compiler may emit a GOT-based access to it. For some
reason, that combined with our synthesized symbols not being .globl
seems to cause the linker to resolve it to a completely random GOT entry
and get confused? I haven't fully figured out what's going on there.

Possibly these symbols should be .globl to support GOT accesses, but
given we don't want GOT accesses anyway, go ahead and correctly mark
them as synthesized symbols so we don't have this issue. (We probably
could have, equivalently, put a hidden visibility attribute on the decls
in the source code, and then the compiler wouldn't use the GOT at all.
But for now, I've kept solving this in the way we've solved this
before.)

This fixes the variant of crbug.com/520369788 I managed to repro, but
since the original bug contains insufficient information to reproduce it
(and what seems like hallucinations), I am not sure whether this
actually fixes it.

Bug: 520369788
Change-Id: I6b8103550fc2820aba8731e2d19cc2be1114b4e8
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/boringssl/+/96887
Presubmit-BoringSSL-Verified: boringssl-scoped@luci-project-accounts.iam.gserviceaccount.com <boringssl-scoped@luci-project-accounts.iam.gserviceaccount.com>
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
13 files changed
tree: bfd0d224ba48180295e25687774f800839e437fb
  1. .bcr/
  2. .github/
  3. bench/
  4. cmake/
  5. crypto/
  6. decrepit/
  7. docs/
  8. fuzz/
  9. gen/
  10. include/
  11. infra/
  12. pki/
  13. rust/
  14. ssl/
  15. third_party/
  16. tool/
  17. util/
  18. .bazelignore
  19. .bazelrc
  20. .bazelversion
  21. .clang-format
  22. .clang-format-ignore
  23. .clangd
  24. .gitattributes
  25. .gitignore
  26. API-CONVENTIONS.md
  27. AUTHORS
  28. BREAKING-CHANGES.md
  29. BUILD.bazel
  30. build.json
  31. BUILDING.md
  32. CMakeLists.txt
  33. codereview.settings
  34. CONTRIBUTING.md
  35. FUZZING.md
  36. go.mod
  37. go.sum
  38. INCORPORATING.md
  39. LICENSE
  40. MODULE.bazel
  41. MODULE.bazel.lock
  42. PORTING.md
  43. PRESUBMIT.py
  44. PrivacyInfo.xcprivacy
  45. README.md
  46. SANDBOXING.md
  47. SECURITY.md
  48. STYLE.md
README.md

BoringSSL

BoringSSL is a fork of OpenSSL that is designed to meet Google's needs.

Although BoringSSL is an open source project, it is not intended for general use, as OpenSSL is. We don't recommend that third parties depend upon it. Doing so is likely to be frustrating because there are no guarantees of API or ABI stability.

Programs ship their own copies of BoringSSL when they use it and we update everything as needed when deciding to make API changes. This allows us to mostly avoid compromises in the name of compatibility. It works for us, but it may not work for you.

BoringSSL arose because Google used OpenSSL for many years in various ways and, over time, built up a large number of patches that were maintained while tracking upstream OpenSSL. As Google's product portfolio became more complex, more copies of OpenSSL sprung up and the effort involved in maintaining all these patches in multiple places was growing steadily.

Currently BoringSSL is the SSL library in Chrome/Chromium, Android (but it's not part of the NDK) and a number of other apps/programs.

Project links:

To file a security issue, use the Chromium process and mention in the report this is for BoringSSL. You can ignore the parts of the process that are specific to Chromium/Chrome.

There are other files in this directory which might be helpful: