> 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 Wed
On Wednesday 23 November 2005 15:04, Chris wrote:
> Hi list,
>
> i have some problems with the client-binaries from blaisorblade (hard
> lockups) and are unable to compile my own 2.6.13 or .14.
> it always keeps crashing with this error (on different systems, but all
> with the hardened toolchain):
Hi list,
i have some problems with the client-binaries from blaisorblade (hard
lockups) and are unable to compile my own 2.6.13 or .14.
it always keeps crashing with this error (on different systems, but all
with the hardened toolchain):
pc1 linux-2.6.13-gentoo-r5 # make linux ARCH=um
CHK i
13 matches
Mail list logo
