Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 09 Dec 1998 12:12:51 -0500
From:      "Steve Friedrich" <SteveFriedrich@Hot-Shot.com>
To:        "Gregory Sutter" <gsutter@pobox.com>, "Michael Borowiec" <mikebo@Mcs.Net>
Cc:        "questions@FreeBSD.ORG" <questions@FreeBSD.ORG>
Subject:   Re: Securing the FreeBSD console
Message-ID:  <199812091715.MAA32666@laker.net>

next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 9 Dec 1998 10:50:07 -0600 (CST), Michael Borowiec wrote:

>Just FYI...  I'm introducing FreeBSD at work, a 1000-seat engineering
>environment, where people share offices and labs that don't lock.
>Most of the UNIX folk in my environment were horrified by these defaults -
>but moreso by the lack of documentation pointing them out. It was even
>suggested the OS not be used at all, for fear that (1) the FreeBSD team
>either doesn't understand, or doesn't take commercial security concerns
>seriously, and (2) that there are probably many more undocumented actions
>in a "hobbyist (read TOY) OS" that could be exploited to gain fast access.

Just my two cents...
I think it's funny your people are *horrified* by this situation, yet
they have implemented absolutely NO physical security at all.  This is
really quite absurd, because NO PC is secure if I have physical access.


Unix systems measure "uptime" in years, Winblows measures it in minutes.



To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199812091715.MAA32666>