Re: [gentoo-hardened] hardened workstation - is that worth it?

On 5 Dec 2008 at 18:21, Javier Martínez wrote:

> Have you said me that I'm obsoleted?, ok, I agreed with you... o:),
> but since I don't use xorg in servers... no problem. You still having
> the other problems I commented.

if you mean the /dev/mem issue, it's been solved to an extent in grsec
for a long time now as it restricts what range in that device you can
actually access - no physical memory for a start, so your trick of patching
anything in kernel memory wouldn't fly. current 2.6 series also try to offer
something like that (CONFIG_STRICT_DEVMEM) but as usual it's somewhat broken.

> One question, somebody knows what made
> xorg incompatible with pax mprotect restrictions in earlier versions?.

it was the so-called elfloader, which was the X module loader supported
and used by most distros back in the day. it handled .o files (ET_REL type
in ELF terms) and performed relocation and symbol resolution itself.

> I put you a link that is newer than the link that Brian Kroth posted
> and still having the incompatibilities on:
> http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/hardened/pax-quickstart.xml, maybe a
> mistake?

yes, from a quick glance, many of these hardened docs could do with a
little update ;).