Thanks to everyone involved in the Gentoo Hardened project, especially
Spender and Pax Guy, for the effort and guidance throughout the years. The
anecdotes shared in this thread echo my own experiences to a degree, and
I've learned a lot about computer security by trying to get the grsec RBAC
syste
2017.Április 29.(Szo) 20:43 időpontban Daniel Cegiełka ezt írta:
>> That's the part I don't get either. Since the only possible motivation
>> I can think of for this move is to generate more income, they could've
>> at least tried asking the community for donations first.
>
> It's more complex:
>
>
2017-04-29 19:04 GMT+02:00 Luis Ressel :
> On Sat, 29 Apr 2017 17:56:10 +0200
> Daniel Cegiełka wrote:
>
>> By the way, I don't know what the Gentoo Hardened or Alpine Linux
>> have done wrong, that now are left out in the cold.
>
> That's the part I don't get either. Since the only possible motiv
On Sat, 29 Apr 2017 17:56:10 +0200
Daniel Cegiełka wrote:
> By the way, I don't know what the Gentoo Hardened or Alpine Linux
> have done wrong, that now are left out in the cold.
That's the part I don't get either. Since the only possible motivation
I can think of for this move is to generate m
On Sat, 29 Apr 2017 18:52:56 +0200
Javier Juan Martinez Cabezon wrote:
> It's not one PaX alternative as its only one of its features but rsbac
> recently implemented native W or X and seems to work fine
If you're only looking for userland W^X, SELinux has some support for
that, too (I don't kno
It's not one PaX alternative as its only one of its features but rsbac
recently implemented native W or X and seems to work fine
On 29/04/17 17:56, Daniel Cegiełka wrote:
> 2017-04-29 14:47 GMT+02:00 Alex Efros :
> It's not about grsecurity, it's about PaX. This was the basic layer
> of protect
Hi!
On Sat, Apr 29, 2017 at 03:46:54PM +0200, PaX Team wrote:
> > But at soon as their customers (say, some government org or large
> > company) will APPLY that patch to Linux kernel and try to DISTRIBUTE that
> > kernel on their computers
>
> there's no need to speculate on this, the FSF has alr
2017-04-29 14:47 GMT+02:00 Alex Efros :
> Hi!
>
> On Sat, Apr 29, 2017 at 01:49:20PM +0200, Luis Ressel wrote:
>> I suppose we all just grudgingly switch over to gentoo-sources?
>
> I wonder for how long time current kernel with grsec will be more safe and
> protected against new exploits than up-t
On 29/04/2017 15:11, Alex Efros wrote:
> Sure, they can sell their patch to Linux kernel without opensourcing that
> patch. But at soon as their customers (say, some government org or large
> company) will APPLY that patch to Linux kernel and try to DISTRIBUTE that
> kernel on their computers - the
On 29 Apr 2017 at 16:11, Alex Efros wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On Sat, Apr 29, 2017 at 01:49:20PM +0200, Luis Ressel wrote:
> > in case anyone hasn't read in on LWN yet, here's what I'm talking
> > about: https://grsecurity.net/passing_the_baton.php
>
> Sorry for OT, but is this legal? Or, more correct, i
Hi!
On Sat, Apr 29, 2017 at 01:49:20PM +0200, Luis Ressel wrote:
> in case anyone hasn't read in on LWN yet, here's what I'm talking
> about: https://grsecurity.net/passing_the_baton.php
Sorry for OT, but is this legal? Or, more correct, is this will works?
Sure, they can sell their patch to Lin
Hi!
On Sat, Apr 29, 2017 at 01:49:20PM +0200, Luis Ressel wrote:
> I suppose we all just grudgingly switch over to gentoo-sources?
I wonder for how long time current kernel with grsec will be more safe and
protected against new exploits than up-to-date gentoo-sources…
Something new in security: a
Hello,
in case anyone hasn't read in on LWN yet, here's what I'm talking
about: https://grsecurity.net/passing_the_baton.php
In short, the grsecurity upstream folks decided they don't give a shit
about the benefits of open source anymore even though their work
wouldn't even possible without those
13 matches
Mail list logo
