Date: Wed, 26 Mar 1997 12:47:33 -0600 (CST) From: "Thomas H. Ptacek" <tqbf@enteract.com> To: adam@homeport.org (Adam Shostack) Cc: dg@root.com, adrian@obiwan.aceonline.com.au, tqbf@enteract.com, freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Privileged ports... Message-ID: <199703261847.MAA28329@enteract.com> In-Reply-To: <199703261631.LAA15307@homeport.org> from "Adam Shostack" at Mar 26, 97 11:31:57 am
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> for each low numbered port? It seems that (modulo configuration being > a little painful) this offers the best of both worlds--control over > low numbered ports, but anyone can bind to a port with root's Not only is inetd's configuration much longer, but if it dies (or, more specifically, if an attacker can kill it), your system becomes completely insecure. I think it's a bad idea to have security issues rely on the survival of userland processes. Am I wrong? ---------------- Thomas Ptacek at EnterAct, L.L.C., Chicago, IL [tqbf@enteract.com] ---------------- "If you're so special, why aren't you dead?"
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199703261847.MAA28329>