From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sat May 7 11:32:39 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7DA0516A4D9 for ; Sat, 7 May 2005 11:32:39 +0000 (GMT) Received: from smtp11.wanadoo.fr (smtp11.wanadoo.fr [193.252.22.31]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3622043D1F for ; Sat, 7 May 2005 11:32:39 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from atkielski.anthony@wanadoo.fr) Received: from me-wanadoo.net (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by mwinf1101.wanadoo.fr (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id E0DB91C000AF for ; Sat, 7 May 2005 13:32:37 +0200 (CEST) Received: from pix.atkielski.com (ASt-Lambert-111-2-1-3.w81-50.abo.wanadoo.fr [81.50.80.3]) by mwinf1101.wanadoo.fr (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id C05741C000AC for ; Sat, 7 May 2005 13:32:37 +0200 (CEST) X-ME-UUID: 20050507113237787.C05741C000AC@mwinf1101.wanadoo.fr Date: Sat, 7 May 2005 13:32:37 +0200 From: Anthony Atkielski X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <1183634761.20050507133237@wanadoo.fr> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <20050507110343.GA1647@Alex.lan> References: <20050506103934.10FA34BEAD@ws1-1.us4.outblaze.com> <20050506105433.GA84877@orion.daedalusnetworks.priv> <2410174336.20050506130648@wanadoo.fr> <73834c0c2b28ff7e6a7cb7542d1e453e@chrononomicon.com> <1345420086.20050506204229@wanadoo.fr> <20050507010013.GF3564@Alex.lan> <1047713602.20050507030814@wanadoo.fr> <20050507012802.GI3564@Alex.lan> <335856051.20050507044416@wanadoo.fr> <20050507110343.GA1647@Alex.lan> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: Mailinglist privacy: MY NAME ALL OVER GOOGLE! X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 07 May 2005 11:32:39 -0000 Alex de Kruijff writes: > So? As long as your system is protected by a password nobody has a legal > defence. Unfortunately they do. For example, if they guess a user name and password and it works, they can enter your system and claim that they believed it was okay because nothing told them otherwise. You have to specifically advise them that they must be authorized, otherwise if they accidentally or deliberately enter the system through a technical compromise, they can defend themselves on this basis. > A admin that doesn't put up a warning like "breaking in is a criminal > act" is not at fault legaly or otherwise. Not at fault, perhaps, but he does leave the door open to certain types of compromises. Windows NT was developed with a specific OS feature to provide for this: it displays site-selected text at logon time and requies that the user click to acknowledge the text before logging in successfully. A great many organizations use this feature. -- Anthony