Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 14 Aug 1996 16:30:50 -0500 (CDT)
From:      Joe Greco <jgreco@brasil.moneng.mei.com>
To:        kpneal@interpath.com (Kevin P. Neal)
Cc:        jgreco@brasil.moneng.mei.com, ulf@lamb.net, jkh@time.cdrom.com, hackers@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Nightmare.
Message-ID:  <199608142130.QAA12769@brasil.moneng.mei.com>
In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19960814212017.0074c684@interpath.com> from "Kevin P. Neal" at Aug 14, 96 05:20:17 pm

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> >I tend to agree, but wonder if it would not make more sense to tackle this
> >from a different angle.
> >
> >Consider all the programs that could clobber a mounted file system.  Would
> >it make more sense if we somehow protected a mounted disk device from
> >being clobbered?
> 
> Isn't this one of the things that secure_level > 0 protects you from?
> 
> In fact, yes it is. (reference: page 263, 4.4BSD daemon book).
> 
> >OTOH, this is a can of worms, no matter how you do it.

Maybe I don't need to point this out, but...

The thread started with some beginners who made a sad mistake.  It seems to
me that in order to set securelevel > 0, you need to know what you are
doing.  How do you protect the newbies who are not used to UNIX/FreeBSD
and who therefore would not have any idea to set securelevel > 0..

We don't default to a securelevel > 0.

... JG



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199608142130.QAA12769>