| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20040517152904.GA8688@ics.muni.cz> From: krajicek at ics.muni.cz (Ondrej Krajicek) Subject: Support the Sasser-author fund started > > IMHO the data are routed through host CPU anyway, DMA is not as clever > > to locate the proper file in the proper filesystem on the proper > > volume and pass them to the proper network card. You're right that the=20 > > CPU does not have to process every single bit of each (?) file. > > But this could be solved by used more advanced bus architecture > > (PCIX or even something faster) and adding more CPU. Dedicated anti-virus > > chip is a thing which I hope is not going to happen. > > Hmm.. let me get this straight - I can run something like SELinux and get > snappy performance on a 700mz PentiumIII, but to get security out of Windows > I'll need even MORE CPU and a PCIX? What's wrong with this picture? We are talking about on-line anti-virus scanning performance, which is decided mainly by the troughput of the I/O bus and CPU speed. SELinux is about mandatory access control. Ondra +>>>-----------------------------------------------------------------+ |Ondrej Krajicek (-KO| |Institute of Computer Science, Masaryk University Brno, CR | |http://isildur.ics.muni.cz/~ondra krajicek@....muni.cz| +--------------------------------------------------------------------+ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 185 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.grok.org.uk/pipermail/full-disclosure/attachments/20040517/ced92200/attachment.bin
Powered by blists - more mailing lists