Re: Protecting root security
On Tue, 18 May 1999, Tommy Malloy wrote:
> Doesn't the fact that I can go to any Linux box with an install
> disk or cd and gain root access mean that the all Linux
> systems are fundamentally insecure?
Absolutely. Any system to which physical access is allowed, then
the system is vulnerable to a sufficient knowedgable cracker.
> Perhaps the install process could be changed so that root
> password, or some other verification system is required,
> before a reinstall is permitted.
A physical lock is better for security.
An effort such as this is now made: when the system crashes
requiring a manual fsck, the root password is required for system
maintenance.
It isn't much, and I find this irritating on my test machine.
In the situation you envision, security IS important.
> It is true that compromising a system this way requires
> unfettered access to the box. However as Linux is used more and
> more in commercial environments this issue will need to be
> addressed.
I have used machines that have a 'firmmware' password, PCs provide
this, as do many machines. If you allow physical access, one can
disconnect the battery from the CMOS, and eliminate the password.
There seems to me to be nothing you can do to provide security
against entry if you allow physical access.
Someone on this list said, approximately: "A secure system is
turned off and sealed in concrete."
--David
David Teague, dbt@cs.wcu.edu
Debian GNU/Linux Because software support is free, timely,
useful, technically accurate, and friendly.
(Thanks guys!)
Reply to: