From owner-freebsd-hackers Thu Aug 8 02:20:10 1996 Return-Path: owner-hackers Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id CAA25313 for hackers-outgoing; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 02:20:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from parkplace.cet.co.jp (parkplace.cet.co.jp [202.32.64.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id CAA25308 for ; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 02:20:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (michaelh@localhost) by parkplace.cet.co.jp (8.7.5/CET-v2.1) with SMTP id JAA13452; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 09:19:55 GMT Date: Thu, 8 Aug 1996 18:19:55 +0900 (JST) From: Michael Hancock To: Bruce Evans cc: Hackers@FreeBSD.org, jds@TracerTech.COM Subject: Re: kern_mib.c:int securelevel = -1; In-Reply-To: <199608080849.SAA28939@godzilla.zeta.org.au> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On Thu, 8 Aug 1996, Bruce Evans wrote: > >BSD/OS and NetBSD are using options INSECURE to switch this feature on and > >off. I'd also like to have this switch so I don't have to keep patching > >kern_mib.c when I build kernels that use this feature. > > >If there are "mile wide" holes in the securelevel stuff we can state that > >the feature is experimental in the man pages. I still would like to have > >the INSECURE switch added. Just make it the default in the GENERIC kernel > >so it doesn't change the current default behavior. > > The default should not require any options. The new option could be named > A_LITTLE_BIT_SECURE. As people patch up holes we can rename it to A_LITTLE_BIT_MORE_SECURE. ;-) Mike Hancock