Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 25 Apr 2002 12:02:59 +0930
From:      Greg 'groggy' Lehey <grog@FreeBSD.org>
To:        "Jacques A. Vidrine" <nectar@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org>, Jordan Hubbard <jkh@winston.freebsd.org>, Oscar Bonilla <obonilla@galileo.edu>, Anthony Schneider <aschneid@mail.slc.edu>, Mike Meyer <mwm-dated-1019955884.8b118e@mired.org>, hackers@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: Security through obscurity? (was: ssh + compiled-in SKEY support considered harmful?)
Message-ID:  <20020425120259.B79657@wantadilla.lemis.com>
In-Reply-To: <20020424122754.GC42969@madman.nectar.cc>
References:  <20020423131646.I6425@wantadilla.lemis.com> <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1020423110123.64976j-100000@fledge.watson.org> <20020424090655.O6425@wantadilla.lemis.com> <20020424122754.GC42969@madman.nectar.cc>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wednesday, 24 April 2002 at  7:27:55 -0500, Jacques A. Vidrine wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 09:06:55AM +0930, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote:
>> I think the issue here is that individuals make this kind of decision.
>> We need a broader consensus for this kind of change.  As Jochem points
>> out, only 3 people were involved in the decision, all of them people
>> with security profiles which weren't affected by this change.
>
> What, he should have gotten 30 reviewers?  I think what is happening
> here is exactly what should happen: it seems like a good idea to one
> guy; he implements it.  He shows it to a few more folks; they think it
> is a good idea, too.  It gets committed, and the majority of people
> either don't notice it or believe it is a good feature.
>
> But the majority doesn't rule.
>
> The feature sits in the tree and maybe people run into problems with
> it.  If so, it gets fine tuned or backed out.  I think this is what is
> supposed to happen.
>
> For my part, I would like to see the change backed out and rethought.
> I like having the X server not doing TCP by default, but this change
> loses because:
>
>    = It breaks existing configurations with no warning.
>    = The option is in the wrong place (startx) and there is apparently
>      no way to override the default.
>
> I think it would be better to just put `-nolisten tcp' in
> /usr/X11R6/lib/X11/xinit/xserverrc for new installations only.  Then
> the system administrator could easily override it for all users; and
> at least a user can override it for herself.

If he knew about it.  Look at my last message to Terry: we're talking
about a package we don't control here.  If somebody comes to FreeBSD
from another system and X doesn't work the way he expects, he'll blame
FreeBSD, not X.

> Disclosure: I'm unhappy that after upgrading my laptop yesterday, I
> found I couldn't run `x2x',

Because of this issue?

> and had to restart my X session to remedy the problem.

At least you knew what the problem was.

Greg
--
See complete headers for address and phone numbers

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020425120259.B79657>