From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Jun 14 22:39:21 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 854921065673 for ; Sat, 14 Jun 2008 22:39:21 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from v.velox@vvelox.net) Received: from vulpes.vvelox.net (vulpes.vvelox.NET [74.200.198.26]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 659548FC29 for ; Sat, 14 Jun 2008 22:39:21 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from v.velox@vvelox.net) Received: from vixen42 (c-68-51-74-1.hsd1.il.comcast.net [68.51.74.1]) (Authenticated sender: v.velox) by vulpes.vvelox.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id B3274B836; Sat, 14 Jun 2008 17:41:13 -0500 (CDT) Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2008 17:40:39 -0500 From: "Zane C.B." To: David Naylor Message-ID: <20080614174039.4c7fff96@vixen42> In-Reply-To: <200806112225.36221.naylor.b.david@gmail.com> References: <200806112225.36221.naylor.b.david@gmail.com> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.4.0 (GTK+ 2.12.9; i386-portbld-freebsd6.3) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD and User Security X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2008 22:39:21 -0000 On Wed, 11 Jun 2008 22:25:32 +0200 David Naylor wrote: > Hi All, > > Today I read an article describing how my government had lost > ZAR200 000 000 from fraud. This is just under $25 000 000. The > article credited this loss largely due to the use of spyware. > > My question is how secure is FreeBSD (including KDE, GNOME and > XFCE) to attacks, including cracking and spyware. In addition, is > there anyway to prevent a user from executing a program that is not > owned by root (i.e. any program installed by the user), this would > prevent spyware being installed (assuming root has been properly > locked down) and subsequently run. Ugidfw(8) can be used to help with the executable stuff. The same is true for using a restricted shell. The important thing is making sure to make sure the user can't execute any thing other than the few commands they are suppose to. If allowed access to execute any thing in a system bin/sbin path, you begin to run into issues with interpreters, which are as good as being able to execute something owned by them. You can remove permissions to access them, but that strikes me as beginning to get a bit hairy in the long run.