Path: utzoo!telly!attcan!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!jbc
From: seanf@sco.COM (Sean Fagan)
Newsgroups: comp.std.unix
Subject: Re: Standards Update, IEEE 1003.6: Security
Message-ID: <10114@cs.utexas.edu>
Date: 15 Jul 90 01:52:16 GMT
References: <780@longway.TIC.COM> <786@longway.TIC.COM> <790@longway.TIC.COM> <802@longway.TIC.COM>
Sender: jbc@cs.utexas.edu
Reply-To: seanf@sco.COM (Sean Fagan)
Organization: The Santa Cruz Operation, Inc.
Lines: 24
Approved: jbc@cs.utexas.edu (Guest Moderator, John B. Chambers)

From:  seanf@sco.COM (Sean Fagan)

In article <802@longway.TIC.COM> std-unix@uunet.uu.net writes:
>As an example, we purchased an AT&T 630 (386 PC type machine) to run
>AT&T SV/MLS (B1 UNIX). We had AT&T put the software on, and they set,
>as is required the passwords.
>
>Whereas the same hardware with normal UNIX would have very vulnerable.

Do you honestly believe that, short of encrypting the data on the disk, 
sufficient security is going to keep your data "safe" if your machine is
(physicially) compromised?

Uh-huh.
-- 
-----------------+
Sean Eric Fagan  | "Just think, IBM and DEC in the same room, 
seanf@sco.COM    |      and we did it."
uunet!sco!seanf  |         -- Ken Thompson, quoted by Dennis Ritchie




Volume-Number: Volume 20, Number 129