firewalling capabilities / release criteria
On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 01:44:25PM +0200, Niels Möller wrote:
> "John H. Robinson, IV" <jhriv@ucsd.edu> writes:
>
> > Debian (using a linux, bsd, or gnumach/l4 (micro)kernel) should be
> > ``Secure by default.'' if this means that no firewalling -> no debian
> > release, then so be it.
>
> But a different, safer and more robust way to be "secure by default"
> is to simply not enable the network services in the first place.
i agree with that. this is why you will never see sendmail, bind,
wu-*, or *nuke on any system that i have complete control over.
as i went on to say, i know that the hurd uses a different sort of
authentication scheme (a matter of privledge escalation, as opposed to a
process of privledge shedding) so that would probably require evaulation
as to what firewalling capabilities are required
there are other firewalling issues, such as NAT (ipmasq) and a decision
(and prefereably published) as to exactly what firewalling features are
_required_.
a nice, published ``release criteria'' (ie: all of base+standard, theses
optional packages, and 75% of the remnainder (or their functionality),
an rbuilder for security updates, and this that and the other thing)
would be a boon for porters.
-john
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: