Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 14:45:45 +0200 From: Vallo Kallaste <kalts@estpak.ee> To: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> Cc: Soeren Schmidt <sos@spider.deepcore.dk>, Sheldon Hearn <sheldonh@starjuice.net>, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: /dev/acd*t* no longer available in -current? Message-ID: <20021115124545.GA2174@tiiu.internal> In-Reply-To: <20021115122950.GA16194@rot13.obsecurity.org> References: <20021115084430.GI76728@starjuice.net> <200211150848.gAF8muEU060773@spider.deepcore.dk> <20021115122950.GA16194@rot13.obsecurity.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Nov 15, 2002 at 04:29:50AM -0800, Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> wrote: > > > Don't you think it makes more sense for the kernel to start off with > > > more restrictive permissions, and have the administrator determine > > > whether more restrictive permissions are appropriate? > > > > Actually no I dont. > > The security aware admin will know (or should that be "should know" :) ) > > what to do to make a system secure. > > That's a particularly uncompelling argument. Yes. For what it's worth, I think that system should be airtight out of the box and the consequences for average desktop user (as I am) clearly documented in handbook. Users who will not read the fine documentation fully deserve the pain. Moreover, they probably will not make a way as fine FreeBSD user in a long run. Be sure you read the following line: IMHO -- Vallo Kallaste kalts@estpak.ee To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20021115124545.GA2174>