Date: Wed, 3 Feb 1999 02:31:36 -0800 (PST) From: "Richard J. Dawes" <rjdawes@physics.ucsd.edu> To: security@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: tcpdump Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.3.96.990203015359.21387A-100000@leucadia> In-Reply-To: <199902030850.TAA25314@cheops.anu.edu.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>From "LINT": "The `bpfilter' pseudo-device enables the Berkely Packet Filter. Be aware of the LEGAL and administrative consequences of enabling this option." [emphasis mine] That there isn't word one about security implications notwithstanding, I am forced to wonder if there were not some more legalistic reason behind the decision to leave `bpfilter' unenabled in GENERIC. Interestingly, neither bpf.c nor bpf(4) is any more enlightening, on either point. ======================================== Richard J. Dawes rdawes@ucsd.edu ======================================== To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.SOL.3.96.990203015359.21387A-100000>