From owner-freebsd-security Fri May 17 11:44:59 1996 Return-Path: owner-security Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id LAA08719 for security-outgoing; Fri, 17 May 1996 11:44:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mole.mole.org (marmot.mole.org [204.216.57.191]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id LAA08712 for ; Fri, 17 May 1996 11:44:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from mail@localhost) by mole.mole.org (8.6.12/8.6.12) id SAA09686; Fri, 17 May 1996 18:44:14 GMT Received: from meerkat.mole.org(206.197.192.110) by mole.mole.org via smap (V1.3) id sma009674; Fri May 17 18:43:43 1996 Received: (from mrm@localhost) by meerkat.mole.org (8.6.12/8.6.9) id LAA02710; Fri, 17 May 1996 11:43:43 -0700 Date: Fri, 17 May 1996 11:43:43 -0700 From: "M.R.Murphy" Message-Id: <199605171843.LAA02710@meerkat.mole.org> To: kduling@natasha.scccc.com Subject: Re: very bad Cc: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Sender: owner-security@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > Personally, I prefer having the instructions, but it's not a good idea... Me too. I hate the STO argument thread, and to avoid it, might it not be a Good Thing to do a security sweep of the system, say look at all suid/sgid, IFS holes, and all exec* with no absolute path that are lurking. vfsload probably isn't the only one. ;-) -- Mike Murphy mrm@Mole.ORG +1 619 598 5874 Better is the enemy of Good