Xref: utzoo comp.unix.internals:2628 comp.unix.admin:1679 Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!cs.utexas.edu!chinacat!sequoia!rpp386!jfh From: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F Haugh II) Newsgroups: comp.unix.internals,comp.unix.admin Subject: Re: Unix security additions Summary: Secure backup and restore Message-ID: <19234@rpp386.cactus.org> Date: 25 Apr 91 00:31:03 GMT References: <39950@cup.portal.com> <1991Mar14.230944.9184@eci386.uucp> Organization: River Parishes Programming, Austin TX Lines: 29 In article , peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) writes: > In article <1991Apr12.101319.8523@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu> thomson@hub.toronto.edu (Brian Thomson) writes: > > In article peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) writes: > > >Sure: back up to tape, read tape on a non-secure system, edit it, write > > >it out again, and restore. > > > You don't get a secure installation by buying a secure machine and > > putting it in a location where a user can tamper with its backup tapes. > > We're not talking about random users here. We're talking about the regular > backup operators. You are assuming that the restore program will allow you to restore files that were not placed on it using the restore on the system it came from. > > Of course secure systems require physical safeguards! > > Of course, but who watches the people who work behind those safeguards? At some point in time you have to trust the people that you have given the authority to do these things. It's like the argument about the earth riding on the back of turtles. It can't be turtles all the way down. -- John F. Haugh II | Distribution to | UUCP: ...!cs.utexas.edu!rpp386!jfh Ma Bell: (512) 255-8251 | GEnie PROHIBITED :-) | Domain: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org "If liberals interpreted the 2nd Amendment the same way they interpret the rest of the Constitution, gun ownership would be mandatory."