From owner-freebsd-security Wed Feb 3 08:01:13 1999 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA29582 for freebsd-security-outgoing; Wed, 3 Feb 1999 08:01:13 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu (khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu [18.24.4.193]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id IAA29577 for ; Wed, 3 Feb 1999 08:01:12 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from wollman@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu) Received: (from wollman@localhost) by khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id LAA24689; Wed, 3 Feb 1999 11:01:09 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from wollman) Date: Wed, 3 Feb 1999 11:01:09 -0500 (EST) From: Garrett Wollman Message-Id: <199902031601.LAA24689@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> To: Richard Dawes Cc: security@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: tcpdump In-Reply-To: References: <199902030850.TAA25314@cheops.anu.edu.au> Sender: owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org < said: >> From "LINT": > "The `bpfilter' pseudo-device enables the Berkely Packet Filter. Be > aware of the LEGAL and administrative consequences of enabling this > option." [emphasis mine] > forced to wonder if there were not some more legalistic reason behind the I wrote that text. It was intended as a CYA since network eavesdropping (the only thing people used BPF for at the time) is probably regulated by law and/or company policies in many places. (For example, depending on the circumstances, the US Privacy Act might apply. IANAL; if it matters to you, hire one.) -GAWollman -- Garrett A. Wollman | O Siem / We are all family / O Siem / We're all the same wollman@lcs.mit.edu | O Siem / The fires of freedom Opinions not those of| Dance in the burning flame MIT, LCS, CRS, or NSA| - Susan Aglukark and Chad Irschick To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message