| 1 |
Mike Edenfield wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> I've never been able to get mono to build with the hardened kernel |
| 4 |
> extensions active. The problem, as you might have already deduced, is |
| 5 |
> that mono violates some of hardened's protection bits -- specifically, |
| 6 |
> the mono runtime tries to execute data as code. Once mono's installed |
| 7 |
> you can flag the binary to permit this. But during the build, a new |
| 8 |
> mono binary is built then run against some IL code, and it fails. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> I have always had success in building mono by keeping a separate |
| 11 |
> kernel around without and of the GRSEC stuff compiled it. It's a pain |
| 12 |
> in the ass but works. I suspect the only real 'solution' would be to |
| 13 |
> somehow hack up the ebuild to detect GRSEC and set the proper flags on |
| 14 |
> the new binary mid-build. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
Thank you for your reply. This makes sense. I guess the problem is that |
| 17 |
I need to run .net as a service on an internet visible server. I do not |
| 18 |
however want to remove hardened just for the sake of .net support! |
| 19 |
Do you think it is possible to create an entirely seperate chroot |
| 20 |
environment on said server, from which to run apache on a non-standard |
| 21 |
port, which is non-hardened and has mono support? |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Cheers, |
| 24 |
-c |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
> |
| 27 |
> --Mike |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
-- |
| 30 |
gentoo-hardened@g.o mailing list |
Archives