Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2007 11:48:19 -0800 (PST) From: Lamont Granquist <lamont@scriptkiddie.org> To: Chuck Swiger <cswiger@mac.com> Cc: Nathan Vidican <nathan@vidican.com>, FreeBSD Questions <questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: How dangerous a Standard User could be to a FreeBSD box? Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.60.0701121146001.7483@sploit.scriptkiddie.org> In-Reply-To: <E7599201-E4C7-41F8-AD2B-8094AA1C1511@mac.com> References: <20070111052604.BAC5D16A575@hub.freebsd.org> <20070111062058.GA44045@ns.umpquanet.com> <45A6412C.308@vidican.com> <20070112003315.GA37679@ns.umpquanet.com> <E7599201-E4C7-41F8-AD2B-8094AA1C1511@mac.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 11 Jan 2007, Chuck Swiger wrote: > On Thu, Jan 11, 2007 at 08:52:44AM -0500, Nathan Vidican wrote: >> Gotcha all beat, screw the 'standard user' issue... I had a client call >> me once cause the office cat peed onto/into the server; no technical >> expertise required whatsoever, no password, no re-wiring of network, >> heck no opposable digits even or anything else for that matter, yet it >> still managed to kill the server ;) > > That cat is rather fortunate the server didn't kill the cat at the same time. I haven't lived with a cat in awhile, but don't they tend to 'spray' rather than 'stream' so that a direct line of current would not be established from the PSU to the cat?
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.GSO.4.60.0701121146001.7483>