Re: [Tails-dev] Memory Erasure Development

On Mon 2017-01-02 14:46:30 -0500, intrigeri wrote: > Now, taking a step back, I wonder: why does why GRKERNSEC_KMEM > disables kexec? > > Is it because it's deemed dangerous in itself? Then perhaps it's be > worth asking grsec people if they'd be open to controlling the kexec > part with a more

Re: [Tails-dev] Memory Erasure Development

intrigeri writes: > What's the current status? Hi Intrigeri, Currently, I have a mostly-working prototype, but I'm not particularly happy with the performance; it needs some more attention. Most of the problems are with the way I'm doing the memory mapping; I need to switch

Re: [Tails-dev] Memory Erasure Development

Hi! Harlan Lieberman-Berg: > intrigeri writes: >> No: Tails 3.0 (based on Debian Stretch) will be x86_64 only. > Awesome! I've got one or two more bugs to crush, and I need to get > final sign-off from my employer, but I'll reach out wiht the results of > testing once I

Re: [Tails-dev] Memory Erasure Development

intrigeri writes: > Sounds great! Back in the days we had started experimenting with > a GRUB2 module to do that, so this definitely rings a bell :) Yeah; I looked into that a bit, but I decided I really wanted a project that's all assembly, so there isn't a possibility of a

Re: [Tails-dev] Memory Erasure Development

Hi Harlan, Harlan Lieberman-Berg: > I've been working on a project to develop a stripped-down multiboot2 > compatible kernel which can be used to quickly clear all the system > memory on a computer. (The idea is to be able to kexec() into this > kernel and have confidence that as little area

[Tails-dev] Memory Erasure Development

Hello Tails developers, I've been working on a project to develop a stripped-down multiboot2 compatible kernel which can be used to quickly clear all the system memory on a computer. (The idea is to be able to kexec() into this kernel and have confidence that as little area needs to be preserved