Re: Grsec/PaX and Exec-shield
> [NB: When reponsding using the web archives, please get the References
> and In-Reply-To: correctly. You may also consider setting MFT:]
I can't post from the lists.debian.org site.
> On Tue, 04 Nov 2003, Peter Busser wrote:
> >> PaX would take much more time so I can't do it.
> > You cannot do it or you don't want to do it?
> Russell has made it adequately clear that he doesn't have the time or
> the desire to deal with PaX at this time. As a volunteer, that's
> always his prerogative. [As a side note, if you are trying to enlist
> volunteers, I strongly suggest not berating other developers while
> doing it.]
Agreed, Russell is free to do what he wants.
However, other Debian developers benefit from having accurate information, to
base their opinions on. And so far I have seen statements on PaX that have been
anything but accurate.
I'm not in fact trying enlist volunteers. I try to offend as many Debian people
as possible, so that they choose exec-shield. This to ensure that Adamantix
will has an edge in security over Debian in the future. And it seems to be
working very well so far.
Besides that, I can imagine that gr-security does not work on the current
Debian kernels. But really, PaX and gr-security are two completely different
things. PaX is related to gr-security in the same way the Linux kernel is
related to Debian. It is just a part of it, but the PaX project is independent
> > In fact, anyone can do it Russell, I'm pretty sure even you can do
> > it:
> Why not volunteer to make the .deb, get a sponsor and get it uploaded
Good idea! Already did that in fact. So who do I send this new kernel-source
The Adamantix Project
Taking high-security Linux out of the labs, and into the real world