From owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed Feb 11 09:36:52 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2425016A4CE
	for <freebsd-security@freebsd.org>;
	Wed, 11 Feb 2004 09:36:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from moek.pir.net (moek.pir.net [130.64.1.215])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D0D343D1F
	for <freebsd-security@freebsd.org>;
	Wed, 11 Feb 2004 09:36:52 -0800 (PST)	(envelope-from pir@pir.net)
Received: from pir by moek.pir.net with local (Exim)
	id 1AqyI7-0003Xz-00
	for freebsd-security@freebsd.org; Wed, 11 Feb 2004 12:36:51 -0500
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 12:36:51 -0500
From: Peter Radcliffe <pir@pir.net>
To: Liste FreeBSD-security <freebsd-security@freebsd.org>
Message-ID: <20040211173651.GC4282@pir.net>
Mail-Followup-To: Liste FreeBSD-security <freebsd-security@freebsd.org>
References: <B217C8ED-5CA9-11D8-ADF8-0030654D97EC@patpro.net>
	<20040211172958.8439.qmail@web60407.mail.yahoo.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20040211172958.8439.qmail@web60407.mail.yahoo.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i
X-fish: <darwin><
X-Copy-On-Listmail: Please do NOT Cc: me on list mail.
Subject: Re: Question about securelevel
X-BeenThere: freebsd-security@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
Reply-To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org
List-Id: Security issues [members-only posting]
	<freebsd-security.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-security>,
	<mailto:freebsd-security-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-security>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-security@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-security-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-security>,
	<mailto:freebsd-security-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 17:36:52 -0000

twig les <twigles@yahoo.com> probably said:
> There was a blurb on this in the 3rd Ed. of Practical Unix &
> Internet Sec.  Basically they opined that hard drives with a
> physical switch for read-only would be neat in some
> circumstances since you can still write to a read-only fs if you
> can get to the raw device.  If anyone has a link to a drive that
> has that I'd be interested to see.

I've seen quite a few drives with a jumper setting for RO, documented
as read only, or "write protect".

Picking up a random disk on my desk (a Sun branded seagate ST39102LC,
scsi LVD/SE disk) it has a jumper labelled "WRITE PROTECT".

P.

-- 
pir