it's PaX and the gap code started there not grsec. second, you'll rescind this one very quickly i'm afraid.
1
also consider that for remote kernel bugs there's already entropy in the diversity of kernel images.
without hardcoded addresses? 'cos in that case KASLR plays no role. to be useful KASLR (and any defense mechnism ) needs a bug which is...
and when was the last (or better, first) time you/anyone had exploited a remote kernel bug w/o KASLR and hardcoded addresses? :)
1
2
the KSPP is a company sponsored project to rip our code without our help. their employees' incompetence isn't helping them either.
3
2
you should then bring this up on lkml as it's a core document that must be understandable by all potential contributors.
the KSPP's way of building their 'community' is to start banning the most potent contributors over the broken ego of Daniel Micay.
Hi strcat, it's easy to ban me from ##linux-hardened IRC for no reason but are you also able to ban me from ring 0 👇
6
13
daniel blocked me, but you can verify the code they took from us and how they misrepresented copyright (git Author line).
which is why i asked who the copyright owner is. git's way of tracking it is the author line, your commit is lying about it.
1
nobody includes all the necessry history in every copy either but then that wasn't my question either.
1
my question has nothing to do with the license but copyright law itself. knowing the copyright on that code is very much meaningful.
1
how does the commit i linked you to establishes the copyright owner of that code? you have yet to answer my initial question.
1
it's a lie, slab sanitization was fully credited in pax-linux-3.10.3-test4.patch (too long to quote here even). ask the author if in doubt.
1
i don't use git nor do i have to. you on the other hand made exactly zero efforts to find out copyright ownership from Brad or me.
1
it's a big fat lie and libel. i have always credited outside contributors in the respective patches.