From owner-freebsd-questions Tue Feb 17 21:56:45 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA26013 for freebsd-questions-outgoing; Tue, 17 Feb 1998 21:56:45 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from proxyb1.san.rr.com (proxyb1-atm.san.rr.com [204.210.0.10]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id VAA25971 for ; Tue, 17 Feb 1998 21:56:23 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from Studded@san.rr.com) Received: from san.rr.com (dt050ndd.san.rr.com [204.210.31.221]) by proxyb1.san.rr.com (8.8.7/8.8.8) with ESMTP id VAA07409; Tue, 17 Feb 1998 21:55:41 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <34EA77DE.37AC0663@san.rr.com> Date: Tue, 17 Feb 1998 21:55:42 -0800 From: Studded Organization: Triborough Bridge and Tunnel Authority X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (X11; I; FreeBSD 2.2.5-STABLE-0216 i386) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: mgraffam@mhv.net CC: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: gcc 2.8.0 References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG mgraffam@mhv.net wrote: > I agree that limited access to the C compiler helps improve the security > of the system, but you must remember that you are using PC's with a > free OS. You make a lot of good points, none of which I'm disputing. However I am firmly of the opinion however that part of security is making things as difficult as possible for the boneheads. Obviously there's a lot more to it than deleting gcc. :) Doug -- *** Chief Operations Officer, DALnet IRC network *** *** Proud operator, designer and maintainer of the world's largest *** Internet Relay Chat server. 5,328 clients and still growing. *** Try spider.dal.net on ports 6662-4 (Powered by FreeBSD) To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message