Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
	designates 209.85.213.175 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=209.85.213.175; envelope-from=witchspace81@gmail.com;
	helo=mail-yx0-f175.google.com; 
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <d6060149473a3262940e624e13e6e061.squirrel@webmail.xs4all.nl>
References: <4aa4401704cc1e7a1665971b79684a83.squirrel@webmail.xs4all.nl>
	<d6060149473a3262940e624e13e6e061.squirrel@webmail.xs4all.nl>
Date: Sat, 3 Sep 2011 07:04:44 +0000
Message-ID: <CAJNQ0stL3yP9mJtPMEjWZeHtKT-3kZ+Psbpfs1XtVnEnd6x2gQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: John Smith <witchspace81@gmail.com>
To: rmeijer@xs4all.nl
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=00151750ed5cbd8d4904ac041740
Cc: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] BitCoin and MinorFs/AppArmor
Precedence: list

--00151750ed5cbd8d4904ac041740
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 8:32 PM, Rob Meijer <capibara@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

--00151750ed5cbd8d4904ac041740
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 8:32 PM, Rob Meijer <=
span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:capibara@xs4all.nl" target=3D"_blank=
">capibara@xs4all.nl</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_qu=
ote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex=
">

Given that there was not a single response to my post, I gather there is<br=
>
no to little interest in an updated MinorFs that could be used by bitcoin<b=
r>
on systems that support AppArmor (Ubuntu and OpenSuse).<br></blockquote><di=
v><br>Oh yes there is interest. I meant to reply but haven&#39;t been able =
to put much energy in bitcoin development lately.<br><br>More strict privil=
ege seperation between applications on a least-authority basis is something=
 that Ubuntu is certainly going to need if they&#39;re serious with the app=
 store thing (and want to keep up with Android and Macosx...).<br>
=A0
<br>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, browser=
s, pgp, ...)<br><br>Wallet encryption is useful and necessary but no substi=
tute for OS-level protection. <br>
<br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8=
ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204);padding-left:1ex">

<br>
Nevertheless I&#39;ve put down the initial set of specs for a rewrite of<br=
>
MinorFs for if anyone would like to comment on them to make a future match<=
br>
with Bitcoin more likely, I&#39;m open to all sugestions:<br>
<br>
<a href=3D"http://minorfs.polacanthus.net/wiki/Concepts_for_MinorFs2" targe=
t=3D"_blank">http://minorfs.polacanthus.net/wiki/Concepts_for_MinorFs2</a><=
br></blockquote><div><br>You have to rewrite the entire thing from scratch?=
<br>
<br>This is probably blasphemy but: how can it be compared to the android m=
odel, with a UID per application/user, and thus layering the security on to=
p of current UNIX/ACL permissions?=A0 Is another FS really needed?<br><br>
JS<br><br>
</div></div>

--00151750ed5cbd8d4904ac041740--