Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

GrSecurity: The Truth About Linux 4.6 [Security]

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #41
    Originally posted by unixfan2001 View Post
    If he wanted to keep people from modifying the code without also renaming the resulting fork (thus infringing on his precious trademark)
    Read this. https://grsecurity.net/announce.php

    They live on donations and sponsorships, if a crappy unofficial port made by a company that wants to claim to be using grsecurity ruins their name, they are marooned.

    Red Hat did a similar thing too.

    he shouldn't have gone for the GPL.
    Are you stupid? This is a kernel patch, it has to be GPL or it violates the kernel's GPL. They are small enough to get insta-nuked by the FSF, or anyone really.
    Note that it's not hard for a big company to just go and make a bunch of minor contributions to the kernel, claim grsecurity are violating the GPL of the kernel, win in court, and then force them to become their sex slaves or something.

    Still, he is limiting the patches for stable kernels (and older) not the "testing" patch, but I doubt that if a distro kernel mantainer approaches them with the right credentials they won't provide him the patch for his distro's kernel.

    Comment


    • #42
      Originally posted by Hunger.hu View Post
      Do you understand that there were an underflow _BEFORE_ anything is changed on the source code by Grsecurity?
      imbecile, do you understand that i was not discussing underflow? i was discussing your non-existent patch review which accepted patch for unsigned < 0
      now fuck off

      Comment


      • #43
        Originally posted by pal666 View Post
        imbecile, do you understand that i was not discussing underflow? i was discussing your non-existent patch review which accepted patch for unsigned < 0
        now fuck off
        As starshipeleven already said: it is open source. You troll and your trollop mom can review too.

        Comment


        • #44
          Flame war aside here on that twitter thing.. People want Linux to be a lot of things, a phone, a router, a desktop, a server, a super computer, a robot on mars, a cow milking machiene etc etc.. and those things sometimes conflict. I feel like it kind of hurts Linux as a whole to be focusing on so many different aspects. I think the BSD's have the right approach because they have a lot fewer distros and they are pertty speific to what role you want the system to preform.

          Comment


          • #45
            Originally posted by float View Post
            Neither of these bugs are as trivial to detect as the Grsecurity one.
            One comment before i wrote THREE example of the SAME "trivial bug" in mainline kernel.

            Comment


            • #46
              Originally posted by k1e0x View Post
              Flame war aside here on that twitter thing.. People want Linux to be a lot of things, a phone, a router, a desktop, a server, a super computer, a robot on mars, a cow milking machiene etc etc.. and those things sometimes conflict. I feel like it kind of hurts Linux as a whole to be focusing on so many different aspects. I think the BSD's have the right approach because they have a lot fewer distros and they are pertty speific to what role you want the system to preform.
              Linux isn't focusing on a damn. It's manufacturers that take linux to make their stuff, and sometimes contribute back.

              BSD follows the same approach, as BSD-like stuff runs in consoles, in firewalls, inside servers, in other random things, but less than linux.

              Comment


              • #47
                Originally posted by starshipeleven View Post

                Linux isn't focusing on a damn. It's manufacturers that take linux to make their stuff, and sometimes contribute back.

                BSD follows the same approach, as BSD-like stuff runs in consoles, in firewalls, inside servers, in other random things, but less than linux.
                Well systemd comes from the Desktop side of Linux. (freedesktop.org) because booting was slow.. but it's the mainstream init system now for just about every Linux distro save a few. Nobody cares how slow a boot is on a server, but everyone added it anyhow. I couldn't imagine a desktop project like PCBSD influencing FreeBSD in such a way.. FreeBSD would have to want to change the system themselves, and when they control the entire OS, not just the kernel they have that ability to choose.

                Comment

                Working...
                X