On Mon, 2003-03-10 at 14:38, Jack Bowling wrote: > On Mon, Mar 10, 2003 at 12:24:04PM -0500, Me wrote: > > Ah! Perhaps it's the CONFIG_JBD=y. It works! Happy day!!! > > > > Thank you to everyone for your help. With that out of the way, do most of > > you guys use loadable module support? I've avoided it because it seemed > > like an unneeded security risk. What does everyone think? > > > > Note that none other than Alan Cox is lobbying for only having loadable modules in > the kernel and doing away with static builds. Who am I to argue with the > Wizard? >
That is going to drive the security gurus nuts. Some of the really hard sore guys think that having a kernel with loadable modules at all is an unnecessary security hole. I am not at all sure how this would be accomplished but I think the thinking is if the hack is in a kernel module is could be difficult indeed to detect. Bret -- redhat-list mailing list unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
