don for being so dense.
Cheers,
Marc
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Sandino
Araico Sánchez
Sent: Friday, September 17, 2004 5:20 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Vserver] Reiser4 views/process oriented security proposal
Marc E. Fiuczynski
for being so dense.
Cheers,
Marc
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Sandino
Araico Sánchez
Sent: Friday, September 17, 2004 5:20 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Vserver] Reiser4 views/process oriented security proposal
Marc E. Fiuczy
he needs the hosting
provider to setup a new iptables rule or a new grsec ACL.
Marc
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Sandino
Araico Sánchez
Sent: Wednesday, September 15, 2004 10:36 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Vserver] Reiser4 views
: [Vserver] Reiser4 views/process oriented security proposal
Christian Mayrhuber wrote:
>Could become interesting:
> http://www.namesys.com/blackbox_security.html
>
>
The process-oriented ACL seems functionality equivalent to grsec
process-based ACLs.
One disadvantage of grsec + vse
Christian Mayrhuber wrote:
Could become interesting:
http://www.namesys.com/blackbox_security.html
The process-oriented ACL seems functionality equivalent to grsec
process-based ACLs.
One disadvantage of grsec + vserver is that ACLs are applied system-wide
and must be administered on the moth
Am 04. Aug 2004, um 11:16:25 schrieb Ehab Heikal:
> I know this is not the core of this list but could you elaborate on how
> is hardware bad these days. What kinds of tests do you run to reduce
> this. I see that you have very very valueable know-how and would really
> appreciate it :)
The qu
I know this is not the core of this list but could you elaborate on how
is hardware bad these days. What kinds of tests do you run to reduce
this. I see that you have very very valueable know-how and would really
appreciate it :)
Avery Pennarun wrote:
On Tue, Aug 03, 2004 at 10:11:22AM +1200, S
On Tue, Aug 03, 2004 at 10:11:22AM +1200, Sam Vilain wrote:
> Reiserfs3 is supposed to be stable , but the last time I had a
> filesystem gain mysterious unstat()able inodes with it was only months
> ago, with 2.4.25.
For what it's worth, we use reiser3 on every server we sell (several
thousand s
Christian Mayrhuber wrote:
> Could become interesting:
> http://www.namesys.com/blackbox_security.html
> What do you think, maybe views instead of chroot() + mount --bind?
Just think how many years it took databases to get transactions and
views right ... but it is exciting nonetheless, no doubt
