Xref: utzoo alt.security:2578 comp.unix.internals:2850 Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!cis.ohio-state.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!sei.cmu.edu!fs7.ece.cmu.edu!o.gp.cs.cmu.edu!andrew.cmu.edu!jh4o+ From: jh4o+@andrew.cmu.edu (Jeffrey T. Hutzelman) Newsgroups: alt.security,comp.unix.internals Subject: Re: BSD tty security, part 3: How to Fix It Message-ID: Date: 19 May 91 22:57:54 GMT References: <19270@rpp386.cactus.org> <25833:May1416:43:4291@kramden.acf.nyu.edu> <3136@cirrusl.UUCP> <19306@rpp386.cactus.org>, <3140@cirrusl.UUCP> Organization: Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA Lines: 18 In-Reply-To: <3140@cirrusl.UUCP> dhesi%cirrusl@oliveb.ATC.olivetti.com (Rahul Dhesi) writes: > (pause) +++ (pause) --- (pause) &&& (pause) > -- > Rahul Dhesi > UUCP: oliveb!cirrusl!dhesi Of course, you actually don't want to use the sequence (pause) +++ (pause), because that will produce really confusing results if someone ever tries to invoke it over a modem that recognizes that. Of course, a modem connection isn't all that secure anyway because it's easy to tap, but someone might still consider themselves secure enough despite that. On the other hand, an in-band SAK sequence over the phone would be a dead giveaway to someone wathing that you're about to type something sensitive, like a password. -------------------- Jeffrey Hutzelman America Online: JeffreyH11 Internet: jh4o+@andrew.cmu.edu BITNET: JHUTZ@DRYCAS >> Apple // Forever!!! <<