Ian Jackson writes:
> I propose that we institute a stricter policy regarding setuid-root
> Some requirements I think might be useful, individually or in
> combination would be:
> * Code must have been written with the intent that it would be setuid.
> * Code must be reasonably widely-used in the world at large.
Wait a moment. That would mean we cannot include a new piece of software
that is written to be setuid just because no one used it before.
> * Code must be reviewed (possible alternative to widespread use?)
Not a bad idea.
> * Approval required by a security-conscious person that conditions
> have been met.
Almost the same as above, isn't it?
Michael Meskes | _____ ________ __ ____
firstname.lastname@example.org | / ___// ____/ // / / __ \___ __________
email@example.com | \__ \/ /_ / // /_/ /_/ / _ \/ ___/ ___/
firstname.lastname@example.org | ___/ / __/ /__ __/\__, / __/ / (__ )
Use Debian GNU/Linux! | /____/_/ /_/ /____/\___/_/ /____/
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org . Trouble? e-mail to Bruce@Pixar.com
- From: Ian Jackson <email@example.com>