Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 12:23:37 +0100 From: njs3@doc.ic.ac.uk (Niall Smart) To: Darren Reed <avalon@coombs.anu.edu.au>, njs3@doc.ic.ac.uk (Niall Smart) Cc: eivind@yes.no, dima@best.net, jayrich@room101.sysc.com, security@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: bsd securelevel patch question Message-ID: <E0ylXMP-0003KN-00@oak71.doc.ic.ac.uk> In-Reply-To: Darren Reed <avalon@coombs.anu.edu.au> "Re: bsd securelevel patch question" (Jun 15, 8:58pm)
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Jun 15, 8:58pm, Darren Reed wrote: } Subject: Re: bsd securelevel patch question > > btw, using the immutable flag(s) without setting the securelevel > 0 is > fruitless as raw device access remains open... > > using both, is required, if you're going to use either. > 1 you mean. Secure level 0 is insecure mode. Niall To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe security" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?E0ylXMP-0003KN-00>