Re: Technical repercussions of grsecurity removal

Andrew Savchenko <[email protected]> Mon, 1 May 2017 14:00:19 +0300

Newsgroups	gmane.linux.gentoo.hardened
Message-ID	<[email protected]>

Hi,

On Mon, 1 May 2017 12:24:14 +0200 Daniel Cegiełka wrote:
[...]
> Summing up:
> 
> * PaX is the most important part of Gentoo Hardened project
> (Grsecurity, SELinux, RSBAC)
> 
> * We can't use the 'grsecurity' name, which means that fork of
> grsecurity == rewriting everything with 'grsecurity' (or 'grsec')
> name... (~225k LOC grsec+PaX)
> 
> * PaX (~176k LOC) is available as a separate patch (1), so we can use
> it without the risk of 'grsecurity' trademark
> 
> My opinion is: we should continue to use PaX patch and keep the Gentoo
> Hardened project alive.
> 
> (1)  https://www.grsecurity.net/~paxguy1/

Are you sure PaX patches will be updated? Because PaXTeam claims
they will not be published [1]:

"As this is a joint decision, there will be no public PaX patches
for future kernels. This is effective April 26th 2017."

Or do you suggest to support PaX with our own resources?

[1] https://grsecurity.net/passing_the_baton_faq.php


Best regards,
Andrew Savchenko

signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 833 B)