Dailydave mailing list archives
Re: In defense of Mandatory Access Control, was Re: No more Novell AppArmor?
From: pageexec () freemail hu
Date: Sat, 28 Mar 2009 08:48:36 +0200
On 26 Mar 2009 at 16:28, Travis wrote: [SEalotry deleted]
I realize I've written quite a bit about this, but after seeing security experts discussing minutia of reverse-engineering and address space layout randomization and W^X and NX and stackguard and so on, I'm a bit surprised about seeing so many people being snarky about such a powerful security technology. I guess I'll just have to chalk it up to cynicism about any new protective technologies; it's cool to be dismissive and aloof. If you can find major areas it doesn't cover, you can call it ineffective.
do 'exploitable kernel bugs' count? _______________________________________________ Dailydave mailing list Dailydave () lists immunitysec com http://lists.immunitysec.com/mailman/listinfo/dailydave
Current thread:
- In defense of Mandatory Access Control, was Re: No more Novell AppArmor? Travis (Mar 26)
- Re: In defense of Mandatory Access Control, was Re: No more Novell AppArmor? pageexec (Mar 28)
- Re: In defense of Mandatory Access Control, was Re: No more Novell AppArmor? Peter Busser (Mar 31)