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>