lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1999]   [Dec]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: malware defense
Hi,

On Mon, 6 Dec 1999 10:23:36 -0000, "Daniel J Blueman"
<daniel.j.blueman@stud.umist.ac.uk> said:

> I think that one good partial solution to security with modules anyway could
> be:

> - extending the module (/binary?) format in 2.4/2.5 to include digital
> signatures
...
> I think this is a step in the right direction. Really, it shouldn't be hard
> to implement, apart from encryption exporting

Encryption != authentication. As long as the module plaintext isn't
encrypted, I wouldn't have thought there would be any problems with
adding signatures.

--Stephen

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:55    [W:0.076 / U:0.044 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site