> Instead, another possibility is the use of SELinux - I say that because
> Antoine Martin some time ago has written a SELinux policy and possibly he's
> going to share that, on request, after some tidyup (that's possibly needed).
I intend to publish my policy files with some help and explanation
On Friday 25 November 2005 18:47, Blaisorblade wrote:
> I talk about the SKAS patch on the host. You can use a host without it and
> run a guest binary >= 2.6.13 in SKAS0 mode, which is as secure as SKAS3 and
> fast enough (not as fast as SKAS3 though).
And since it's fairly unlikely that your /tm
Blaisorblade wrote:
>On Saturday 26 November 2005 01:41, Chris wrote:
>
>
>>>Let me think - you refer to the SKAS3 patch merged with grsec?
>>>
>>>
>
>
>
>>>You have a
>>>
>>>*) 2.6.12 (the bug could have been fixed)
>>>
>>>
>>>*) with SKAS (it may be at fault)
>>>
>>>
>>too inse
On Saturday 26 November 2005 01:41, Chris wrote:
> >Let me think - you refer to the SKAS3 patch merged with grsec?
> >You have a
> >
> >*) 2.6.12 (the bug could have been fixed)
> >
> >
> >*) with SKAS (it may be at fault)
>
> too insecure, so isn't really an option
I talk about the SKAS patch on
>Let me think - you refer to the SKAS3 patch merged with grsec?
>
>
>
No, i was not able to apply both, skas and grsec, so i used
gentoo-sources-2.6.12-r10 patched with skas3, no grsec.
>I looked into this time ago on request, after somebody posted a merge, but I
>deadlocked on a problem for c
Antoine, I'm CC:ing you about your UML SELinux policy - see below for context.
On Friday 25 November 2005 13:12, Chris wrote:
> Chris wrote:
> >Blaisorblade wrote:
> >>Yep, this crash wasn't described in your original mail, so please add all
> >>details about the compilation environment, the host
Chris wrote:
>Blaisorblade wrote:
>
>>Yep, this crash wasn't described in your original mail, so please add all
>>details about the compilation environment, the host kernel, the hardware and
>>the scenario triggering the host crash (if any).
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>here we go:
>
>Portage 2.0.51.
Blaisorblade wrote:
>On Thursday 24 November 2005 02:19, Blaisorblade wrote:
>
>
>>On Wednesday 23 November 2005 22:07, Chris wrote:
>>
>>>kidding aside, i asked because i was wondering why the host crashed
>>>
>>>
>>Ok, that's different - no matter which fscking compiler you use, the ho
On Thursday 24 November 2005 02:19, Blaisorblade wrote:
> On Wednesday 23 November 2005 22:07, Chris wrote:
> > i guess, if it was "not intended to be stable", someone should slap all
> > the devs with a big frozen troud *lol*
> >
> > kidding aside, i asked because i was wondering why the host cra
On Wednesday 23 November 2005 22:07, Chris wrote:
> would explain everything, thx for your fast reply.
> are there plans to test it on hardened? or any arguments why not? (just
> curious).
Just developer's time - Gcc thinks to be smarter than us on some more
toolchains beyond hardened :-(. We're
oops, wrong button ;)
Original Message
Subject:Re: [uml-user] can't compile client >2.6.12
Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 21:54:32 +0100
From: Chris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Blaisorblade <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Blaisorblade wrote:
>On Wednesday 23 November 2005
11 matches
Mail list logo
