Date: Sat, 19 Jun 1999 01:26:09 -0500 (CDT) From: Frank Tobin <ftobin@bigfoot.com> Cc: FreeBSD-security Mailing List <freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: proposed secure-level 4 patch Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.10.9906190121320.60367-100000@srh0710.urh.uiuc.edu> In-Reply-To: <199906190619.QAA28681@cheops.anu.edu.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Darren Reed, at 16:19 on Sat, 19 Jun 1999, wrote: > > Using a securelevel of -2 for this is `better', but it means your kernel > must boot up with a securelevel of -1 (or less), init scripts change it > to be >= 0 so that init raises it to (at least) 1 once they're all finished. Erm, I think you are confusing two separate ideas that were discussed. This would be securelevel 4 (the patch). It allows the non-binding of privileged ports. Secure-level -2 was addressing a totally different system where user-processes could bind to privileged ports without root's help. -- Frank Tobin "To learn what is good and what is to be http://www.bigfoot.com/~ftobin valued, those truths which cannot be shaken or changed." Myst: The Book of Atrus FreeBSD: The Power To Serve PGPenvelope = GPG and PGP5 + Pine PGP: 4F86 3BBB A816 6F0A 340F http://www.bigfoot.com/~ftobin/resources.html 6003 56FF D10A 260C 4FA3 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.10.9906190121320.60367-100000>