Am 02:55 2003-07-03 +0200 hat Luis Gomez - InfoEmergencias geschrieben:
On Miércoles, 2 de Julio de 2003 15:05, Preben Randhol wrote:
What about: http://www.nsa.gov/selinux/ ?
For the sake of God, how in hell can we associate nsa.gov with secure?
Excuse me if I'm bullshitting, but I understand
Am 02:55 2003-07-03 +0200 hat Luis Gomez - InfoEmergencias geschrieben:
On Miércoles, 2 de Julio de 2003 15:05, Preben Randhol wrote:
What about: http://www.nsa.gov/selinux/ ?
For the sake of God, how in hell can we associate nsa.gov with secure?
Excuse me if I'm bullshitting, but I understand
Peter == Peter Cordes [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[...]
Peter Luckily, that's a solved problem. Con Kolivas's -ck3 patch for
Peter 2.4.21 includes grsecurity and XFS.
There's also wolk, which contains grsecurity, XFS, and a ton of other
patches.
http://sourceforge.net/projects/wolk
--
Oh men, I didn't pay attention to the thread for all the day. Thank you VERY
much!!!
I'll be taking a look at them ASAP. Thanks ppl!!!
Pope
On Jueves, 3 de Julio de 2003 04:28, Hubert Chan wrote:
Peter == Peter Cordes [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[...]
Peter Luckily, that's a
On Thu, Jul 03, 2003 at 07:43:23PM +0200, Ulrich Scholler wrote:
During the reign of 2.4.19, I've had problems with kswapd dying after a
few days of uptime when I used the -ck patches. Is this still the case?
I'll let you know in a few days...
root 4 0.0 0.0 00 ?
Peter == Peter Cordes [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[...]
Peter Luckily, that's a solved problem. Con Kolivas's -ck3 patch for
Peter 2.4.21 includes grsecurity and XFS.
There's also wolk, which contains grsecurity, XFS, and a ton of other
patches.
http://sourceforge.net/projects/wolk
--
Hi,
On Wed Jul 02, 2003 at 22:50:20 -0300, Peter Cordes wrote:
Luckily, that's a solved problem. Con Kolivas's -ck3 patch for 2.4.21
includes grsecurity and XFS. (I didn't mention it before because I didn't
realize it was significant. (I'm not using ACLs).) Con's webpage is
Oh men, I didn't pay attention to the thread for all the day. Thank you VERY
much!!!
I'll be taking a look at them ASAP. Thanks ppl!!!
Pope
On Jueves, 3 de Julio de 2003 04:28, Hubert Chan wrote:
Peter == Peter Cordes [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[...]
Peter Luckily, that's a
On Tue, 1 Jul 2003, valerian wrote:
On Tue, Jul 01, 2003 at 02:36:37PM +0200, Javier Castillo Alcibar wrote:
Hi all,
I want to setup a new linux server in internet (apache, php, postfix,
mysql, dns...), and I would like to patch the standard kernel with some
security patches. but
Alvin Oga [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 02/07/2003 (12:46) :
rest of the kernel hardening patches
http://linux-sec.net/Harden/kernel.gwif.html
What about: http://www.nsa.gov/selinux/ ?
--
Ada95 is good for you.
http://www.crystalcode.com/codemage/MainMenu/Coding/Ada/IntroducingAda.php
--
To
On Wed, Jul 02, 2003 at 01:17:22PM +0200, Thomas Sjgren wrote:
-- than use the latest php, apache, postfix, mysql, dns
- probably want to chroot your dns app
... and don't forget to build the packages with your SSP patched GCC :)
I doubt if SSP provides additional security beyound
On Miércoles, 2 de Julio de 2003 15:05, Preben Randhol wrote:
What about: http://www.nsa.gov/selinux/ ?
For the sake of God, how in hell can we associate nsa.gov with secure?
Excuse me if I'm bullshitting, but I understand that those people who refuse
to export strong criptography unless it
On Thu, Jul 03, 2003 at 02:55:53AM +0200, Luis Gomez - InfoEmergencias wrote:
On Mi?rcoles, 2 de Julio de 2003 15:05, Preben Randhol wrote:
What about: http://www.nsa.gov/selinux/ ?
For the sake of God, how in hell can we associate nsa.gov with secure?
Excuse me if I'm bullshitting, but I
to a problem that probably others face as well:
combining multiple kernel patches.
In our particular case, it's Linux 2.4.21 + grsecurity + XFS. It's been a
headache today, tomorrow I'll keep on trying to merge the two patches
together. BTW, we opted for XFS because of its ACL system, which allowed
On Tue, 1 Jul 2003, valerian wrote:
On Tue, Jul 01, 2003 at 02:36:37PM +0200, Javier Castillo Alcibar wrote:
Hi all,
I want to setup a new linux server in internet (apache, php, postfix,
mysql, dns...), and I would like to patch the standard kernel with some
security patches. but
Ugly reply, but here goes...
On Tue, Jul 01, 2003 at 04:27:21PM -0700, Alvin Oga wrote:
On Tue, 1 Jul 2003, valerian wrote:
On Tue, Jul 01, 2003 at 02:36:37PM +0200, Javier Castillo Alcibar wrote:
Hi all,
I want to setup a new linux server in internet (apache, php, postfix,
Alvin Oga [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 02/07/2003 (12:46) :
rest of the kernel hardening patches
http://linux-sec.net/Harden/kernel.gwif.html
What about: http://www.nsa.gov/selinux/ ?
--
Ada95 is good for you.
http://www.crystalcode.com/codemage/MainMenu/Coding/Ada/IntroducingAda.php
On Wed, Jul 02, 2003 at 01:17:22PM +0200, Thomas Sjögren wrote:
-- than use the latest php, apache, postfix, mysql, dns
- probably want to chroot your dns app
... and don't forget to build the packages with your SSP patched GCC :)
I doubt if SSP provides additional security beyound
On Miércoles, 2 de Julio de 2003 15:05, Preben Randhol wrote:
What about: http://www.nsa.gov/selinux/ ?
For the sake of God, how in hell can we associate nsa.gov with secure?
Excuse me if I'm bullshitting, but I understand that those people who refuse
to export strong criptography unless it
On Thu, Jul 03, 2003 at 02:55:53AM +0200, Luis Gomez - InfoEmergencias wrote:
On Mi?rcoles, 2 de Julio de 2003 15:05, Preben Randhol wrote:
What about: http://www.nsa.gov/selinux/ ?
For the sake of God, how in hell can we associate nsa.gov with secure?
Excuse me if I'm bullshitting, but I
to a problem that probably others face as well:
combining multiple kernel patches.
In our particular case, it's Linux 2.4.21 + grsecurity + XFS. It's been a
headache today, tomorrow I'll keep on trying to merge the two patches
together. BTW, we opted for XFS because of its ACL system, which allowed
first. However
I'm right now coming to a problem that probably others face as well:
combining multiple kernel patches.
In our particular case, it's Linux 2.4.21 + grsecurity + XFS. It's been a
headache today, tomorrow I'll keep on trying to merge the two patches
together.
Luckily, that's
I'm starting to experiment with the security kernel patches, and I was
wondering if anyone could comment on the lsm (kernel-patch-2.4-lsm) and
grsecurity (kernel-patch-2.4-grsecurity) set of patches, and their
relative advantages/disadvantages. I just set up the grsecurity patch
on my machine
I'm starting to experiment with the security kernel patches, and I was
wondering if anyone could comment on the lsm (kernel-patch-2.4-lsm) and
grsecurity (kernel-patch-2.4-grsecurity) set of patches, and their
relative advantages/disadvantages. I just set up the grsecurity patch
on my machine
hi ya
for a simple 5 minute kernel patch...
http://www.Linux-Sec.net/Harden/kernel.gwif.html
- apply openwall if you are using 2.2.x kernels
- ruh libsafe if you wanna try a prevent some buffer overflows
- if you wanna get into all the fun stuff... lots of other
Hi,
I'm trying to apply the lids2.2.19 kernel patch to a group of 5 machines.
I was hoping to use make-kpkg's patching facility to automate the kernel
build process.
however, when I try to use the PATCH_THE_KERNEL env variable, or adding
patch_the_kernel := yes or patch_the_kernel = yes to
On Sat, 10 Mar 2001 01:12:46 Uriah Welcome wrote:
| On Fri, Mar 09, 2001 at 04:05:17PM -0700, Kevin wrote:
|
|
| Then they only have to compile their own version. Openwall shows only
| you when you run 'w' but shows everyone if you 'who'. Anyone know
| why?
|
|
| Because 'who' just
Am Samstag, 10. Mrz 2001 00:05 schrieb Kevin:
Then they only have to compile their own version. Openwall shows only
you when you run 'w' but shows everyone if you 'who'. Anyone know
why?
No experience with tools like this (LIDS/Openwall etc.)
w and who are different binaries on my system, so
at http://www.openwall.com/linux ... Here you find
the kernel patches ( 2.2.18 is the latest ). A look at www.lids.org
might be usefull too
bye Faith
Hello,
On Wed, Mar 07, 2001 at 05:03:55PM +0100, Niklas H?glund wrote:
Hi!
Anyone know where I can find a kernel patch that restricts users so..
'who' shows only the user himself
who is not a kernel function, it's a system utility.
Something like this will work:
alias who=me=`whoami`; who
On Fri, Mar 09, 2001 at 05:40:03PM -0500, Robert Mognet wrote:
Anyone know where I can find a kernel patch that restricts users so..
'who' shows only the user himself
who is not a kernel function, it's a system utility.
That doesn't mean a kernel patch can't modify its behavior. Have you
Am Freitag, 9. März 2001 23:40 schrieb Robert Mognet:
Hello,
On Wed, Mar 07, 2001 at 05:03:55PM +0100, Niklas H?glund wrote:
Hi!
Anyone know where I can find a kernel patch that restricts users so..
'who' shows only the user himself
who is not a kernel function, it's a system utility.
Then they only have to compile their own version. Openwall shows only
you when you run 'w' but shows everyone if you 'who'. Anyone know
why?
--
Kevin - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- Original message --
Am Freitag, 9. März 2001 23:40 schrieb Robert Mognet:
Hello,
On Wed, Mar 07, 2001 at
On Fri, Mar 09, 2001 at 04:05:17PM -0700, Kevin wrote:
Then they only have to compile their own version. Openwall shows only
you when you run 'w' but shows everyone if you 'who'. Anyone know
why?
Because 'who' just read /var/log/wtmp, where as 'w' looks at the process that
currently
also sprach Kevin (on Fri, 09 Mar 2001 04:05:17PM -0700):
Then they only have to compile their own version. Openwall shows only
you when you run 'w' but shows everyone if you 'who'. Anyone know
why?
well, afaik w and who are two separate programs.
it appears that who uses utmp information
Am Samstag, 10. März 2001 00:05 schrieb Kevin:
Then they only have to compile their own version. Openwall shows only
you when you run 'w' but shows everyone if you 'who'. Anyone know
why?
No experience with tools like this (LIDS/Openwall etc.)
w and who are different binaries on my system, so
Hi!
Anyone know where I can find a kernel patch that restricts users so..
'who' shows only the user himself
'netstat -a' only ports that root/the user owns
'ls' only files that are owned by root/the user
??
//Niklas
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of
Hi!
Anyone know where I can find a kernel patch that restricts users so..
'who' shows only the user himself
'netstat -a' only ports that root/the user owns
'ls' only files that are owned by root/the user
??
//Niklas
On Wed, Mar 07, 2001 at 05:04:17PM +0100, Niklas Höglund wrote:
Anyone know where I can find a kernel patch that restricts users so..
'who' shows only the user himself
http://www.openwall.com/linux/
'netstat -a' only ports that root/the user owns
Openwall can set access rights for /proc
39 matches
Mail list logo
