LinuxQuestions.org

LinuxQuestions.org (/questions/)
-   Linux - Security (http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/linux-security-4/)
-   -   GRSecurity (http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/linux-security-4/grsecurity-187463/)

Obie 05-29-2004 06:36 PM

GRSecurity
 
Hi,

What's the difference between RSBAC and GRSecurity and which should one use?

unSpawn 05-31-2004 07:11 AM

That is a very hard to answer question because I would have to know all the gory details of security architecture wrt SELinux, LIDS, RSBAC, GRSecurity and whatnot (I don't). You could twist my arm and I'd say that I guess RSBAC is similar to SELinux, but the last one has finer grained controls, allows dynamic policy changes and much more. Both RSBAC and SELinux allow much finer grained controls compared to GRSecurity, and that comes at a price, making GRSEC is easier to set up for Linux newbies with not much security admin knowledge (depending on your skills ofcourse).

I think Gentoo deserves credit here, being the only distro I know of that offers prebuilt kernels for LIDS, RSBAC and GRSecurity, which would make it much easier for ppl who like to see what different security architectures are like to work with.

Obie 05-31-2004 06:35 PM

GRSecurity
 
unSpawn,

Thank you. Correct me if I am wrong. I have read that RSBAC is much better in terms of security in comparison to GRSecurity. Also my understanding from what you wrote "Both RSBAC and SELinux allow much finer grained controls compared to GRSecurity, and that comes at a price, making GRSEC is easier to set up for Linux newbies with not much security admin knowledge" that GRSecurity is much easier to setup than RSBAC. However is it enough or would it suffice? Who would use RSBAC in place of GRSecurity?

Thank you

unSpawn 05-31-2004 07:47 PM

However is it enough or would it suffice?
I don't know how to define "enough" in this case. I'd say it depends on your needs and knowledge. If you're a newbie setting up your first SOHO webserver of shellserver I'd say GRSecurity would be a good start (next to other security measures ofcourse). If you're responsable for a network running applications that for instance do complex financial transactions, you'll want something more "advanced", some form of Orange Book compliance.


*BTW Markus, one of our forum members, brought to my attention bad news GRSecurity might not live long. Seems Spender, the main developer, is out of funds cuz one of GRSecurity's sponsors didn't fulfill their promises. If it turns out that way, it definately is sad news.

Obie 05-31-2004 08:04 PM

unSpawn,

Thank you for clearing that up for me. In reference to Markus's news, what would happen should anyone use GRSecurity and it is no longer continued? What are the risks? Digressing, how was GRSecurity being sponsored?

unSpawn 05-31-2004 08:21 PM

what would happen should anyone use GRSecurity and it is no longer continued?
For the current situation: nothing. Once new kernel minor versions are released and people can still patch it: nothing. For 2.6.x: choose something else. AFAIK LSM and GRSEC aren't playing nice together. I'm going to keep patching my 2.4.x boxen until GRSEC breaks, but eventually I'll move to SELinux.


What are the risks?
You mean risks like in GRSEC breaking stuff or coming up with new ways to attack a system?


Digressing, how was GRSecurity being sponsored?
"Badly" probably describes the situation the best :-[

Obie 05-31-2004 08:27 PM

So is it best to stay with Linux Red Hat 9 in a server environment and to keep patching it as you are?

What I mean by risks is what is the risk when GRSecurity is no longer continued? I guess also what would GRSecurity break? (potentially)

What I meant by sponsored, was it cash, etc


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:20 PM.