Date: Sun, 20 Jun 1999 17:13:27 +1000 (EST) From: Nicholas Brawn <ncb@zip.com.au> To: "Brian W. Buchanan" <brian@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU> Cc: Darren Reed <avalon@coombs.anu.edu.au>, freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: proposed secure-level 4 patch Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.05.9906201710460.17277-100000@zipper.zip.com.au> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.05.9906192235070.70357-100000@smarter.than.nu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, 19 Jun 1999, Brian W. Buchanan wrote: > Anyway, this all boils down to a matter of choice. If you value being > able to restart daemons without rebooting, then don't use this level of > protection. Here's an idea i'll toss into the ring. What about runtime integrity checks. If there were some way of guaranteeing that a program being executed has the correct checksum prior to processing execve()? I'm not advocating this line of approach, but it may be one option to consider. Nick To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.LNX.4.05.9906201710460.17277-100000>