Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!neuro.usc.edu!annala
From: annala@neuro.usc.edu (A J Annala)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
Subject: SCO UNIX C2 Security Issues (Re: Why DEC chose SCO UNIX)
Message-ID: <29044@usc>
Date: 28 Dec 90 03:10:38 GMT
References: <29027@usc> <29029@usc> <277916E3.2042@tct.uucp>
Sender: news@usc
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
Lines: 17
Nntp-Posting-Host: neuro.usc.edu

In article <277916E3.2042@tct.uucp> chip@tct.uucp (Chip Salzenberg) writes:
>3.  The C2 security (as described in #2) can be "relaxed", but not
>    disabled.  That is, the default kernel permissions can be broadened
>    from their fascist defaults, but the kernel is still a C2 kernel.
>    So the administrative headaches are still there.

Could someone describe exactly what sysadmsh-->system-->relax actually does
and what more it should do to disable C2 security for software developers?

Thanks, AJ

p.s.  The source microfiche for VMS is mostly BLISS, MACRO assembler code
      generated from BLISS, some FORTRAN, and a few rare PASCAL programs.
      However, I will back away from arguing DEC could have converted VMS
      for use in the 386 environment because there are many more machine
      dependencies in the source code than I originally realized.  Still,
      it is curious DEC adopted SCO UNIX/386 MPX for it's 386 platforms.