[qubes-users] Re: Unofficial forward-ported grsec 4.9 Qubes kernel branch

2017-08-25 Thread Reg Tiangha
On 2017-08-25 8:35 AM, nicholas roveda wrote: > Thanks for all the details. > > I've tested on the R4.0 rc1, so fc25, I'll try it soon on the R3.2 (fc23 and > fc24), so we can crosscheck the script. > > I saw both dom0 and vm rpms are generated, but is it better to generate > different rpms

[qubes-users] Re: Unofficial forward-ported grsec 4.9 Qubes kernel branch

2017-08-25 Thread nicholas roveda
Thanks for all the details. I've tested on the R4.0 rc1, so fc25, I'll try it soon on the R3.2 (fc23 and fc24), so we can crosscheck the script. I saw both dom0 and vm rpms are generated, but is it better to generate different rpms for them with config-host and config-vm? -- You received

[qubes-users] Re: Unofficial forward-ported grsec 4.9 Qubes kernel branch

2017-08-25 Thread nicholas roveda
Thanks for all the details. I've tested on the R4.0 rc1, so fc25, I'll try it soon on the R3.2 (fc23 and fc24), so we can crosscheck the script. I saw both dom0 and vm rpmd are generated, but wouldn't be better to generate different rpms based on config-host and config-guest? -- You received

[qubes-users] Re: Unofficial forward-ported grsec 4.9 Qubes kernel branch

2017-08-24 Thread Reg Tiangha
On 2017-08-24 9:23 AM, Sandy Harris wrote: > At some point, these patches may become unnecessary & perhaps some of > them already are. There is ongoing work aimed at getting related > patches into the mainline Linux kernel. > > Wiki:

[qubes-users] Re: Unofficial forward-ported grsec 4.9 Qubes kernel branch

2017-08-24 Thread Reg Tiangha
On 2017-08-24 4:27 PM, nicholas roveda wrote: > I think Reg has done a great job and the porting its a must go path to force > the developers to throw away all the differences that slow down or prevent > the develop of a secure system. > To be fair, I don't forward port anything; it's @minipli

Re: [qubes-users] Re: Unofficial forward-ported grsec 4.9 Qubes kernel branch

2017-08-24 Thread nicholas roveda
I think Reg has done a great job and the porting its a must go path to force the developers to throw away all the differences that slow down or prevent the develop of a secure system. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "qubes-users" group. To

Re: [qubes-users] Re: Unofficial forward-ported grsec 4.9 Qubes kernel branch

2017-08-24 Thread Sandy Harris
At some point, these patches may become unnecessary & perhaps some of them already are. There is ongoing work aimed at getting related patches into the mainline Linux kernel. Wiki: https://kernsec.org/wiki/index.php/Kernel_Self_Protection_Project Mailing list:

[qubes-users] Re: Unofficial forward-ported grsec 4.9 Qubes kernel branch

2017-08-24 Thread nicholas roveda
Thanks for your answer! I had already noticed that, in fact I'm using the host version as .config, but an error occurs at the line specified above. With the trick of using the current configs and then override them with your file I've managed to build the rpms, but the sign fails (maybe it's

[qubes-users] Re: Unofficial forward-ported grsec 4.9 Qubes kernel branch

2017-08-23 Thread Reg Tiangha
On 2017-08-23 9:01 AM, nicholas roveda wrote: > I'm trying to build your port, but I,ve actually had to to some changes to > `kernel.spec` because the script exits with an error at line 136: > `%_sourcedir/check-for-config-changes .config.orig .config`. > Actually, if you mean that 'make rpms'

[qubes-users] Re: Unofficial forward-ported grsec 4.9 Qubes kernel branch

2017-08-23 Thread nicholas roveda
I'm trying to build your port, but I,ve actually had to to some changes to `kernel.spec` because the script exits with an error at line 136: `%_sourcedir/check-for-config-changes .config.orig .config`. So, here are my changes. Original: 117 if [ -f %_sourcedir/config-%{version} ]; then 118