| 1 |
On Wednesday 06 August 2003 22:48, Ned Ludd wrote: |
| 2 |
> Gentoo Linux includes support for grsecurity in nearly every kernel that |
| 3 |
> we have. Unfortunately the patch level is not always as up2date as Brad's |
| 4 |
> code due to the many other patches that are included, however what I'm |
| 5 |
> wondering here is do the Gentoo users want the option of merging a |
| 6 |
> vanilla-kernel with just "one" patch applied. It would be called |
| 7 |
> grsecurity-sources. I would like to use the grsec2 series for this so we |
| 8 |
> can help Brad debug and get it to a stable level. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> Comments, suggestions and feedback are welcome. |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> PS: grsec is also used on our production servers, sourceforge also uses |
| 13 |
> grsec in a production environment. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
I agree with you on this - adding GRSecurity to vanilla-sources as only one |
| 16 |
patch would be great. |
| 17 |
I suggest that this should be grsec-1.9.x for now, because there is at least |
| 18 |
some docs available, while grsec2 has no docs available (only examples in |
| 19 |
/etc/grsec/acl in default installation; correct me if I'm wrong). |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
I'm using grsec2 since pre versions, and it has been stable in production |
| 22 |
enviroment. In my point, lack of documentation for grsec2 is the only stone |
| 23 |
on the road. More docs would help users to migrate from 1.9.x to 2.x. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
Mikhail. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
-- |
| 28 |
Why use Windows, since there is a door? |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
-- |
| 32 |
gentoo-hardened@g.o mailing list |
Archives