Re: comparison

From: Mdean (mdean@private)
Date: Thu Feb 19 2004 - 13:27:46 PST

  • Next message: Mdean: "Re: comparison"

    Why review the old?  I think it better to start with the 2.6 kernel 
    offerings.  We are developing XN1, a secure application server which not 
    only starts with the 2.6 kernel, but integrates selinux,  enables 
    cryptoloop and signed modules, as well as ssh/ssl and ipsec VPN's for 
    our roving troubadours,. and uses the XFS file ststem, thereby enabling 
    role based authentication..  Contact me personally and I will assist you 
    with some variety of places to go and serious review criteria to apply. 
    
    Michael Dean, CEO
    SourceView Corporation
    currently moving from stealth mode.
    
    Seth Arnold wrote:
    
    >On Thu, Feb 19, 2004 at 09:14:59AM -0800, Chris Wright wrote:
    >  
    >
    >>>Secure distros would be EnGarde (uses LIDS, may or may not be on the LSM 
    >>>version), Immunix (uses LSM for the SubDomain feature), and Trusted 
    >>>Debian (does not use LSM, it uses RSBAC instead).
    >>>      
    >>>
    >
    >(Due to trademark issues, Trusted Debian has renamed to "Adamantix".)
    >
    >  
    >
    >>There are also Debian packages for SELinux, Fedora Core is integrating
    >>SELinux, and same for Hardened Gentoo.  In addition, there are more
    >>distros which do not use LSM, e.g. Trustix and Openwall (sorry to put
    >>those in same context).
    >>    
    >>
    >
    >I don't know what, if anything, Trustix does to claim 'security'.
    >
    >Openwall, on the other hand, I would consider a hardened distribution,
    >even if Solar Designer doesn't have a mandatory access control mechanism
    >in place -- his audited versions of software are significantly smarter
    >than your average bear.
    >
    >  
    >
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Feb 19 2004 - 15:57:41 PST