From owner-freebsd-security Wed Aug 1 17:16: 8 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Received: from Awfulhak.org (gw.Awfulhak.org [217.204.245.18]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B456837B401 for ; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 17:16:03 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from brian@Awfulhak.org) Received: from hak.lan.Awfulhak.org (root@hak.lan.Awfulhak.org [172.16.0.12]) by Awfulhak.org (8.11.4/8.11.4) with ESMTP id f720Fws06594; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 01:15:58 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from brian@lan.Awfulhak.org) Received: from hak.lan.Awfulhak.org (brian@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hak.lan.Awfulhak.org (8.11.4/8.11.4) with ESMTP id f720Fv811693; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 01:15:57 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from brian@hak.lan.Awfulhak.org) Message-Id: <200108020015.f720Fv811693@hak.lan.Awfulhak.org> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.5 07/13/2001 with nmh-1.0.4 To: Kris Kennaway Cc: Brian Somers , Bart Matthaei , Nuno Teixeira , freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG, brian@freebsd-services.com, brian@freebsd-services.com Subject: Re: RELEASE 4.3 -> RELENG_4_3: SUCCESSFULLY but ... In-Reply-To: Message from Kris Kennaway of "Wed, 01 Aug 2001 17:10:47 PDT." <20010801171046.A85330@xor.obsecurity.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2001 01:15:57 +0100 From: Brian Somers Sender: owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > On Thu, Aug 02, 2001 at 01:05:10AM +0100, Brian Somers wrote: > > > This just blows my mind. Not only because I can't see (for example) why= > =20 > > rsh has schg and rshd does not, but also because > > It makes no sense as a security measure. It makes more sense as an > anti-foot-shooting measure, to prevent accidental removal of critical > binaries which are needed to get the system up and minimally running > (init, /kernel, etc). Of course, that argument only works for some on > that list, and the rest should probably have the flag removed. Agreed. I'd definitely consider rshd more critical than rsh (for people that use these programs) for example. sshd may be a good candidate for anti-foot-shooting measures too (against it being accidently removed, not noticed, and the box being rebooted). > Kris -- Brian http://www.freebsd-services.com/ Don't _EVER_ lose your sense of humour ! To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message