From owner-freebsd-arch Sun Jul 9 16:40:35 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mail-relay.eunet.no (mail-relay.eunet.no [193.71.71.242]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E76737BBE7 for ; Sun, 9 Jul 2000 16:40:32 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mbendiks@eunet.no) Received: from login-1.eunet.no (login-1.eunet.no [193.75.110.2]) by mail-relay.eunet.no (8.9.3/8.9.3/GN) with ESMTP id BAA86133; Mon, 10 Jul 2000 01:40:24 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from mbendiks@eunet.no) Received: from localhost (mbendiks@localhost) by login-1.eunet.no (8.9.3/8.8.8) with ESMTP id BAA88595; Mon, 10 Jul 2000 01:40:23 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from mbendiks@eunet.no) X-Authentication-Warning: login-1.eunet.no: mbendiks owned process doing -bs Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 01:40:23 +0200 (CEST) From: Marius Bendiksen To: Adam Cc: Alfred Perlstein , arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: making the snoop device loadable. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > upgrading the kernel. I think it would be nice to prevent easy snooping > without making life hard for the admin. The kernel has all the power over > the computer, I dont think this is an issue that should require > engineering to prevent, I would like my kernel to just say NO. If I have This is an issue of trusting the other administrators. If you don't do so, then you _are_ going to have a hard life. As to the securelevel bits, IIRC then Dag-Erling was working on getting rid of straight securelevels. You might have a chat with him about that. Marius To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message