Ric Moore wrote at 2014-09-26 18:08 -0500: > On 09/26/2014 05:08 PM, green wrote: > >Ric Moore wrote at 2014-09-26 14:18 -0500: > >>Change is certainly needed when any pimple face kid can edit and hide his > >>doings from a text log with nano. I think the change is necessary to harden > >>up our systems. Otherwise, Microsoft will become the only secure server OS, > >>as they don't mind hiding things at all. > > > >So, all other things being equal, binary logs are more secure than > >plain text logs. Is that actually what you are saying? > > Yes. The benefit of using a binary log is the lesser vulnerability to an > external attack from an intruder. That huge security flaw was mentioned on a > recent PBS video regarding the new day Hackers and how simply they > removed/edited text-log files to hide their tracks of what they did. So now the attacker just destroys all the logs instead, because it is easier than editing the binary.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature