On Mon, May 01, 2006 at 02:35:05PM -0700, Martin Bligh wrote:
> Valerie Henson wrote:
> >
> >Honestly, the security nightmare begins with the compile. A patch to
> >the build system can result in arbitrarily insecure commands being run
> >during the compile - way easier than doing something that affects the
> >compiled kernel. A machine doing automatic compiles of untrusted
> >patches should be viewed as completely sacrificial from the beginning.
>
> True - good point ... but it's easier to chroot jail. And I'm lazy ;-)
> If anyone wants to make autotest (http://test.kernel.org/autotest)
> support some sort of virtual boot via creating a UML instance or
> something, that'd be great. But I won't hold my breath ;-)
I think you should do this, security issues be darned. Just wanted to
point out where the real concern was. And thanks in advance!
-VAL
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
