John Smith [ARCHIVE] on Nostr: 📅 Original date posted:2011-09-03 🗒️ Summary of this message: Rob Meijer ...
📅 Original date posted:2011-09-03
🗒️ Summary of this message: Rob Meijer proposed an updated MinorFs for Bitcoin on systems that support AppArmor, but received little response. Ubuntu may need stricter privilege separation for their app store.
📝 Original message:On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 8:32 PM, Rob Meijer <capibara at xs4all.nl> wrote:
> Given that there was not a single response to my post, I gather there is
> no to little interest in an updated MinorFs that could be used by bitcoin
> on systems that support AppArmor (Ubuntu and OpenSuse).
>
Oh yes there is interest. I meant to reply but haven't been able to put much
energy in bitcoin development lately.
More strict privilege seperation between applications on a least-authority
basis is something that Ubuntu is certainly going to need if they're serious
with the app store thing (and want to keep up with Android and Macosx...).
This has been needed for a long time, and this would be useful for any
private data managed by applications running as the same user (ssh,
browsers, pgp, ...)
Wallet encryption is useful and necessary but no substitute for OS-level
protection.
> Nevertheless I've put down the initial set of specs for a rewrite of
> MinorFs for if anyone would like to comment on them to make a future match
> with Bitcoin more likely, I'm open to all sugestions:
>
> http://minorfs.polacanthus.net/wiki/Concepts_for_MinorFs2
>
You have to rewrite the entire thing from scratch?
This is probably blasphemy but: how can it be compared to the android model,
with a UID per application/user, and thus layering the security on top of
current UNIX/ACL permissions? Is another FS really needed?
JS
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20110903/df200631/attachment.html>;
🗒️ Summary of this message: Rob Meijer proposed an updated MinorFs for Bitcoin on systems that support AppArmor, but received little response. Ubuntu may need stricter privilege separation for their app store.
📝 Original message:On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 8:32 PM, Rob Meijer <capibara at xs4all.nl> wrote:
> Given that there was not a single response to my post, I gather there is
> no to little interest in an updated MinorFs that could be used by bitcoin
> on systems that support AppArmor (Ubuntu and OpenSuse).
>
Oh yes there is interest. I meant to reply but haven't been able to put much
energy in bitcoin development lately.
More strict privilege seperation between applications on a least-authority
basis is something that Ubuntu is certainly going to need if they're serious
with the app store thing (and want to keep up with Android and Macosx...).
This has been needed for a long time, and this would be useful for any
private data managed by applications running as the same user (ssh,
browsers, pgp, ...)
Wallet encryption is useful and necessary but no substitute for OS-level
protection.
> Nevertheless I've put down the initial set of specs for a rewrite of
> MinorFs for if anyone would like to comment on them to make a future match
> with Bitcoin more likely, I'm open to all sugestions:
>
> http://minorfs.polacanthus.net/wiki/Concepts_for_MinorFs2
>
You have to rewrite the entire thing from scratch?
This is probably blasphemy but: how can it be compared to the android model,
with a UID per application/user, and thus layering the security on top of
current UNIX/ACL permissions? Is another FS really needed?
JS
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20110903/df200631/attachment.html>;