| 1 |
On Fri, 09 Dec 2005 18:29:22 +0100 |
| 2 |
"Spider (D.m.D. Lj.)" <spider@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> On Fri, 2005-12-09 at 18:21 +0100, Jesús García Crespo wrote: |
| 5 |
> > Hi! I thought that GCC could means a risk if all of the users of my |
| 6 |
> > system are able to run it! I talked this with a friend and he |
| 7 |
> > propossed to create a new group, "compiler", for example, where all |
| 8 |
> > the users who will be able to run gcc must belong to it! |
| 9 |
> > |
| 10 |
> > Wouldn't be interesting to implement this into Gentoo gcc ebuild as |
| 11 |
> > an USE? |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> Exactly what risk is there from an end-user running a compiler? A |
| 15 |
> compiler doesn't access any kind of restricted environment, doesn't |
| 16 |
> auytomatically create binaries with other rights than its own and is |
| 17 |
> about as "safe" a product as there can be. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
I meant something like: |
| 20 |
for (;;) malloc(1000); |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
> If you're really paranoid about execution and so on, start reading the |
| 23 |
> SELinux FAQ and create a ruleset.. The default one is probably more |
| 24 |
> lenient than you want it ;) |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
Yes, I understand. I will read about it. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
Thanks a lot! |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
-- |
| 32 |
Jesús García Crespo (aka Sevein) |
| 33 |
http://www.sevein.com |
| 34 |
correo@××××××.com |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
GnuPG key ID: E2DB17E8 (pgp.escomposlinux.org) |
Archives