From owner-freebsd-security Mon Jul 12 2:45:40 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Received: from cheops.anu.edu.au (cheops.anu.edu.au [150.203.76.24]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 812D014DD6 for ; Mon, 12 Jul 1999 02:45:34 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from avalon@cheops.anu.edu.au) Received: (from avalon@localhost) by cheops.anu.edu.au (8.9.1/8.9.1) id TAA09669; Mon, 12 Jul 1999 19:45:57 +1000 (EST) From: Darren Reed Message-Id: <199907120945.TAA09669@cheops.anu.edu.au> Subject: Re: Module magic To: robert+freebsd@cyrus.watson.org Date: Mon, 12 Jul 1999 19:45:57 +1000 (EST) Cc: security@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: from "Robert Watson" at Jul 12, 99 05:38:37 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] Content-Type: text Sender: owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org In some mail from Robert Watson, sie said: > > Have to be a little careful with structs such as struct proc that have > zero-able and copy-able sections at fork(). As using securelevels to > disable module loading is currently not really too feasible for the > mass-market, the best thing to do might just be to provide a sysctl that > turns off module loading, and encourage server users to toggle the sysctl > once all needed modules are loaded to prevent nasty-modules from being > loaded. Needless to say, it would be a one-way toggle. :-) FWIW, I believe NetBSD systems (and OpenBSD systems) ship configured to boot with securelevel == 0, as opposed to FreeBSD which appears to default to -1. FreeBSD should be the same as the others, in this respect. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message