* Anthony G. Basile schrieb am 02.09.15 um 18:13 Uhr:
> Hi everyone,
> 
> So by now most people have heard the news that the Grsecurity/PaX team 
> are no longer going to be making their stable patches available.  The 
> reason is that they are in dispute with a certain embedded systems 
> vendor and those negotiations broke down.  So they decided to make their 
> stable patches only available to the sponsors. [1]
> 
> What does this mean for Gentoo?  Up until now I have been maintaining 
> both the grsec upstream stable and testing patchsets in our 
> hardened-sources.  Currently the upstream stable kernels are 3.2.71 and 
> 3.14.51 and the testing are 4.1.6.  In about one week, the 3.2.71 and 
> 3.14.51 patchsets will no longer be available and I'll continue pushing 
> out the 4.1.6.  Unfortunately the testing patchset is precisely as the 
> name suggests --- for testing and not production.  For the embedded 
> systems company this will be the kiss of death because those patches are 
> not suitable for long term.  For Gentoo it will mean that I will have to 
> be more vigilant about bugs and trying to stick with a well known kernel 
> before moving on.  You can still use these kernels in production, but 
> you must be carefull about instabilities as upstream pushes out 
> experimental feature that may oops or panic.  Keep older kernel images 
> around and revert if it doesn't work.  Look to this list for 
> announcements about more serious issues like things that can cause data 
> loss.
> 
> I'm hoping that once this company feels the sting of what has just 
> happened, they'll come back to the table and talk with Grsec/PaX people.
> They won't be able to ship boards with grsec anymore because its not so 
> easy to switch out a kernel on a board!  If they ship a board with a 
> bug, they loose.  We just reboot :)
> 
> [1] https://grsecurity.net/

Can't Gentoo be a sponsor? I think we could easly croudfund a 
sponsorship.

This would help Gentoo and Grsecurty/PaX but OTOH that vendor might just 
use the gentoo kernel if they not already did so.

Thoughts?

-- 
0x35A64134 - 8AAC 5F46 83B4 DB70 8317
             3723 296C 6CCA 35A6 4134

Reply via email to