Em 08-07-2011 13:23, Ivan Voras escreveu:
On 08/07/2011 05:42, Ilya Bakulin wrote:
Hi hackers,
As a part of ongoing effort to enhance usage of Capsicum in FreeBSD base
system, I want to ask you, which applications in the base system should
receive sandboxing support.
How about a small descript
On (09/07/2011 15:54), Gabor Kovesdan wrote:
> Em 08-07-2011 13:23, Ivan Voras escreveu:
> > On 08/07/2011 05:42, Ilya Bakulin wrote:
> >> Hi hackers,
> >> As a part of ongoing effort to enhance usage of Capsicum in FreeBSD base
> >> system, I want to ask you, which applications in the base system
On 07/09/2011 07:54, Gabor Kovesdan wrote:
> Anyway, consider sendmail and BIND. I think these are important enough
> to get some more protection.
What additional protection could capsicum offer beyond chroot'ing?
(That's not a snark, I don't quite understand all the moving parts here.)
Doug
--
I know this is a little late, but...
On Jul 5, 2011, at 2:12 PM, Ed Maste wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 05, 2011 at 02:05:27PM -0400, Alexander Kabaev wrote:
>
>> I agree with all of the above reasons, but none of them change the fact
>> that __linux__ is used left and right to identify both kernel and
>
On Jul 5, 2011, at 7:36 AM, Robert Millan wrote:
> 2011/7/5 Dimitry Andric :
>> As far as I can see, this code only gives warnings when compiled with
>> gcc 4.5 or higher, and when using the -Wundef flag. Isn't it easier to
>> just remove the -Wundef flag here?
>
> Here's a patch to remove -Wun
Why on earth would you want this?
Warner
On Jul 7, 2011, at 2:31 AM, grarpamp wrote:
>> possibly achievable in libc?
>
> I don't know. Where else would it be done?
> stat, utimes, gettimeofday, clock_gettime,
> adjtime, etc and their variations.
>
> I've not checked what currently happens, but
6 matches
Mail list logo
