From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Patrick McHardy Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/9] netfilter: xtables: inclusion of xt_SYSRQ Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2010 17:49:32 +0100 Message-ID: <4BA79F9C.7000701@trash.net> References: <1268831945-6041-1-git-send-email-jengelh@medozas.de> <1268831945-6041-8-git-send-email-jengelh@medozas.de> <4BA0DF81.3030204@trash.net> <4BA0E321.2030400@oracle.com> <4BA0EA76.9070307@trash.net> <4BA78965.5060701@oracle.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Jan Engelhardt , netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org To: John Haxby Return-path: Received: from stinky.trash.net ([213.144.137.162]:39084 "EHLO stinky.trash.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751532Ab0CVQte (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Mar 2010 12:49:34 -0400 In-Reply-To: <4BA78965.5060701@oracle.com> Sender: netfilter-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: John Haxby wrote: > On 20/03/10 01:47, Jan Engelhardt wrote: >> On Wednesday 2010-03-17 15:43, Patrick McHardy wrote: >> >>> It seems useful to me, I'm mainly wondering whether there's a chance >>> that we'll get kdboe support in the forseeable future, which would >>> make this pretty much obsolete I guess. >>> >> Well once there's kdboe, we can reevaluate and delete it again. >> Which brings me to the point: is kdboe even secured? >> > > > And does it have the useful low-overhead that xt_SYSRQ has which means > it works even when the rest of the system is in deep trouble? I guess it should. But from what I could find, there are no plans to merge this in the near term. > > (I can't find kbdoe, google has let me down.) Perhaps try kdboe :)