Re: [alpine-devel] grsec go or no-go call for 3.6
> Not viable as machine count is part of the subscription count, which we
> can’t predict. We also can’t redistribute the patch or the subscription
> will be terminated.
> Personally I vote for maintaining grsec for 3.6 and renaming it.
> For the 3.6 releases cycle, we should be reasonably able to maintain the
> patch against 4.9 LTS. We have to revisit this for 3.7+, preferably soon
> after as 3.6 is released, though.
If dormant project like this can raise such a sum, I am sure a security
project (close to kernel) can even larger.
Not sure what game is at play, but after small overview of other LSM/Non-LSM
stackable/non-stackable projects, I think grsec should be kept alive atleast
for 3 yrs or so (irrespective of alpinelinux uses it)
If original author does not like the idea of such crowdfunding, maybe it
should be given a try by community/devs that forks it.
> - Shiz
> > On 27 Apr 2017, at 17:49, Jean-Louis Fuchs <ganwell_at_fangorn.ch> wrote:
> > Hi
> > On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 09:02:42PM +0200, Natanael Copa wrote:
> >> I'd like to keep the grsec patch for 3.6. However, we need rename it. I
> >> think we should call it 'linux-hardened'. That way we can remove the
> >> patch later or switch to something else in future.
> > Could we actually find a sponsor and get a subscription? I mean the
> > source is GPL after all.
> > Best,
> > Jean-Louis
Received on Mon May 01 2017 - 15:32:48 GMT