On Mon, 2010-03-15 at 22:59 +0000, Justin Mason wrote:
> 2010/3/15 John Hardin <jhar...@impsec.org>:
> > On Mon, 15 Mar 2010, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
> >
> >> The following 30 rules appear to have NOT assigned a score in the
> >> tarball. :(
> > I'd expect those sandbox rules to have their scores assigned by the nightly
> > masscheck evaluation process. Daryl?
>
> as I said -- the rules tarball is being built from the 3.3 branch,
> whereas the nightly evaluation process is running off trunk. that's
> why they're not matching.
I might be confused, but why would that result in rules without scores?
Unless rules are removed from trunk, shouldn't it be the other way
round?
> so the question is: should we build the rules tarball from trunk as
> well? if so, what script should we use to do so?
Just a gut feeling, but shouldn't both be built from the branch?
Is the update tarball (like the nightly evaluation) built from trunk? In
that case, the dist tarball probably should, too. It would be what the
users get after an sa-update anyway...
But if we distribute off trunk in sa-update, why the distinction and
need to backport sandbox rules in the first place?
They definitely, absolutely need to match. Score generation with an
alternated rule-set will skew results, if trunk-only rules are missing.
--
char *t="\10pse\0r\0dtu...@ghno\x4e\xc8\x79\xf4\xab\x51\x8a\x10\xf4\xf4\xc4";
main(){ char h,m=h=*t++,*x=t+2*h,c,i,l=*x,s=0; for (i=0;i<l;i++){ i%8? c<<=1:
(c=*++x); c&128 && (s+=h); if (!(h>>=1)||!t[s+h]){ putchar(t[s]);h=m;s=0; }}}
