Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2002 09:07:49 +0930 From: Greg 'groggy' Lehey <grog@FreeBSD.org> To: Daniel Eischen <eischen@pcnet1.pcnet.com> Cc: Frank Mayhar <frank@exit.com>, Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com>, Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.ORG>, Jordan Hubbard <jkh@winston.freebsd.org>, Oscar Bonilla <obonilla@galileo.edu>, Anthony Schneider <aschneid@mail.slc.edu>, Mike Meyer <mwm-dated-1019955884.8b118e@mired.org>, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: More about security, X, rc.conf and changing defaults. Message-ID: <20020424090749.P6425@wantadilla.lemis.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.10.10204231624120.25950-100000@pcnet1.pcnet.com> References: <200204231953.g3NJrunH025061@realtime.exit.com> <Pine.GSO.4.10.10204231624120.25950-100000@pcnet1.pcnet.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tuesday, 23 April 2002 at 16:35:55 -0400, Daniel Eischen wrote: > On Tue, 23 Apr 2002, Frank Mayhar wrote: >> Terry Lambert wrote: >>> FWIW: I wouldn't object to a firewall rule that disallowed remote >>> TCP connections to the X server by default, if the firewall is >>> enabled. I think we already have this... >> >> Yep, I agree, and whether or not it's in the distributed rc.firewall, I >> have the ports blocked in my hand-tuned version. >> >> As to Stijn's remarks, he is putting up a strawman at best. If a person >> runs X, it should be their responsibility to make sure that it's secure. >> Just like if they ran Windows or any other software with potential security >> holes. X is plastered with warnings as it is, why do we need to cripple a >> function it supports? Stijn, if it "opens up a hole in your network," >> that's _your_ problem, not mine. There are many other ways to secure your >> network than by turning off tcp connections by default in the X server. >> Hey, I'm not objecting to adding the capability, I'm just objecting to >> the fact that it was imposed upon everyone else by fiat and (worse) without >> warning. >> >> And before people start saying again that this only affects a port and is >> irrelevant to the operating system itself, this is one symptom of what I >> see as a worsening problem. > > I agree also. Remember what has been stated before, "Tools, not Policy". > If we want to disable this by default, then there should be a customary > knob _where people expect/can see it_. And if we are lacking the > mechanism to do it, then the change should wait until it is present. > It shouldn't be hacked into an unexpected place. Agreed entirely. > I would like to see this backed out. I think it would be reasonable to fix it by tying it to the securelevel. Greg -- See complete headers for address and phone numbers To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020424090749.P6425>