From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Reply-To: kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2016 00:32:20 +0200 From: Solar Designer Message-ID: <20161005223220.GA6533@openwall.com> References: <20161003193418.GA7071@openwall.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [kernel-hardening] Any artists around? To: kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com List-ID: On Mon, Oct 03, 2016 at 12:59:31PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote: > On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 12:34 PM, Solar Designer wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 03, 2016 at 12:16:07PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote: > >> Does anyone have some suggestions or sketches for a logo we could use? > > > > How about a bikeshed? It would convey how hardening is not "perfect > > security", and ack the irony of spending time on discussing a logo. > > I don't even have a preference as to which color the bikeshed should be. > > Haha, yes, exactly. This is the opening image I used in my slides > covering the uid-0/ring-0 lockdown series at LSS on 2014: > > https://outflux.net/bikeshed.jpg Oh, cool. Meanwhile, my Twitter poll ended in favor of bikeshed: https://twitter.com/solardiz/status/783033528736940032 "What should (Linux) Kernel Self Protection Project's logo be? 32% A fancy penguin 42% A bikeshed 7% Other (please tweet what) 19% No logo 116 votes" A bikeshed would also ack the grsecurity project's opinion (as I understand it) that trying to upstream hardening changes (through the hoops) is sort of bikeshedding (in comparison with having made such changes) or that the typical initial response (those hoops) is bikeshedding, and that some of those changes (not in grsecurity) are a bikeshed on their own. This shouldn't stop us, but we can troll ourselves a bit by ack'ing this dissenting opinion in the logo. ;-) Alexander