Bug#56821: [POSSIBLE GRAVE SECURITY HOLD]
On Wed, Feb 02, 2000 at 05:52:55PM +0100, Pierre Beyssac wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 02, 2000 at 09:42:42AM -0600, John Goerzen wrote:
> > As you can see, some of these are within our control, some are not. I
> > believe we should, and have, provide mechanisms to allow a box to be
> > secured in such a fashion. However, using them in such a fashion BY
> > DEFAULT is not in anyone's best interest.
> Oh yes, you're right!
> Given that some people have the atomic bomb anyway, we can get rid
> of any computer security and access control, completely.
It's not that big a deal to most of us. In most instances, IMO,
if you have physical access to the box, there's nothing
stopping you from reading the hard drive anyway. I don't want
to have to fight to do anything on my computer just because
someone needs it set up that way. Likewise, you probably
don't want sudo set up the way I have it, and the lax
permissions I have. It's just as unreasonable to set it
up your way, as it is to set it up mine.
David Starner - email@example.com
If you wish to strive for peace of soul then believe;
if you wish to be a devotee of truth, then inquire.
-- Friedrich Nietzsche