Date: 07 Sep 1999 10:26:18 +0200 From: Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@flood.ping.uio.no> To: Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com> Cc: "Matthew D. Fuller" <fullermd@futuresouth.com>, Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@flood.ping.uio.no>, KATO Takenori <kato@ganko.eps.nagoya-u.ac.jp>, bde@zeta.org.au, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Init(8) cannot decrease securelevel Message-ID: <xzpu2p7ktzp.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no> In-Reply-To: Matthew Dillon's message of "Mon, 6 Sep 1999 13:29:44 -0700 (PDT)" References: <199909060513.PAA12402@godzilla.zeta.org.au> <19990906142342F.kato@gneiss.eps.nagoya-u.ac.jp> <xzp1zcco10z.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no> <199909061539.IAA74893@apollo.backplane.com> <19990906141231.L18814@futuresouth.com> <199909062029.NAA76229@apollo.backplane.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com> writes: > So making DDB 'secure-level friendly' would be a useful thing > tgo do, I think. The idea is not to disable DDB, but to simply > limit the actions that can be performed within it if the securelevel > has been raised. The sysadmin would only be allowed to issue > passive commands, cont, and 'panic'. The sysadmin would not be > allowed to modify the running system. That's an excellent idea - it shouldn't be too hard to add a kernel option (say, DDB_RESTRICTED) and #ifndef the "dangerous" commands. DES (must... write... patches...) -- Dag-Erling Smorgrav - des@flood.ping.uio.no To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?xzpu2p7ktzp.fsf>