Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 29 Nov 1999 19:53:09 -0800 (PST)
From:      Kris Kennaway <kris@hub.freebsd.org>
To:        "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@zippy.cdrom.com>
Cc:        Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com>, Dan Moschuk <dan@FreeBSD.ORG>, arch@FreeBSD.ORG, audit@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: cvs commit: src/sys/i386/conf files.i386 src/sys/kern kern_fork.c src/sys/libkern arc4random.c src/sys/sys libkern.h 
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSF.4.21.9911291950390.65191-100000@hub.freebsd.org>
In-Reply-To: <88174.943927150@zippy.cdrom.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 29 Nov 1999, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote:

> That's highly arguable.  We provide secure levels, for example, but if
> we turned them on to any appreciable degree then people's X servers
> wouldn't work because we have no aperture driver.  Would it be correct
> in the general case?  Yes.  Would it be correct for workstation users?
> No.  Such is also the case in numerous other situations and it really
> is a question of providing mechanisms which people can use selectively,
> not just in providing the best "out of box" security defaults.

This would fall under my preferred policy, which you didn't quote, namely
"turn on everything which doesn't have a negative impact, and providing
an easy mechanism to enable everything else". Preventing X from running is
something many (though not all :) people would consider negative :-)

Kris



To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-audit" 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.4.21.9911291950390.65191-100000>