Hi Mr Hutchings, Could you explain, in short, why it is more secure? It seems, that cryptographically signed modules are something... don't know, more secure, *because before loading the module, the kernel can check the signature and refuse to load any that can't be verified.* ;-)
symlink and hardlink protection also applies to the 2.6.32-5 kernel or it is backported only to the 3.2 version? Both protection seems to be implemented some time ago, right? I mean patch for kernel (not only Debian). I have to apologize for such naive questions, but I started to using Debian a couple of weeks ago and I want to know something more about Project, Debian and everything related etc. One more thing; Is there any website where I can to find any informations about patches, changes backported, for example, from PAX/Grsecurity projects to the Debian kernel - 2.6.32 and 3.2? Best regards!
