Re: Two questions about task-harden.
What difference does it make, whether it's remote or not? A root
vulnerability is something that one would want to avoid, as
much as possible. Task harden's goal is to do that. Imo, it should
veer as much as possible
away from "risky" things; a setuid root sendmail binary is definitely
risky. There are a few must-have setuid root binaries on a fully
functioning debian system, but sendmail is not among them. Perfectly
reasonable alternatives, such as postfix (one setgid postdrop binary),
are available.
On Fri, Aug 24, 2001 at 12:53:34PM +0200, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
>
> Previously Scott K. Ellis wrote:
> > Of course, there is the latest sendmail vunerability that SuSE is reporting.
>
> It's not a remote one though so the impact is quite limited.
>
> Wichert.
>
> --
> _________________________________________________________________
> / Nothing is fool-proof to a sufficiently talented fool \
> | wichert@wiggy.net http://www.liacs.nl/~wichert/ |
> | 1024D/2FA3BC2D 576E 100B 518D 2F16 36B0 2805 3CB8 9250 2FA3 BC2D |
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
>
>
--
"Any OS is only as good as its admin, and you obviously suck."
-- Ian Gulliver, http://orbz.org/mail/mansunix.txt
Reply to: