Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!ncar!ames!haven!ni.umd.edu!sayshell.umd.edu!louie
From: louie@sayshell.umd.edu (Louis A. Mamakos)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next
Subject: Re: Security Hole?
Message-ID: <1990Dec14.131912.28355@ni.umd.edu>
Date: 14 Dec 90 13:19:12 GMT
References: <49464@cornell.UUCP> <108170004@hpcuhd.HP.COM>
Sender: usenet@ni.umd.edu (USENET News System)
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park
Lines: 23
Nntp-Posting-Host: sayshell.umd.edu

In article <108170004@hpcuhd.HP.COM> edwardm@hpcuhd.HP.COM (Edward McClanahan) writes:

>Correct me if I am wrong, but doesn't "disabling" Public Window Server merely
>prevent processes running on other NeXT's (etc...) from openning the display
>on my local NeXT and posting a window to it?  I suspect that Public Sound Port
>works the same way. 

Yes, I presume that it prevent access via the Mach network messaging facility
which make inter-machine Mach messaging look transparent.

> Neither of these "settings" prevents the case where the
>snooper on a remote machine "logs in" to my NeXT and runs a process on my NeXT
>which attaches to the display or the microphone.

Well, I just assumed that it was pretty obvious that if you were concerned
about this type of "security", that you wouldn't let any random "snooper" log
into your machine.

> I think this is the situation
>that the original poster felt there no defense for.  For me, I don't intend on
>letting others run programs on my machine (:-)).

louie