Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!lll-crg!lll-lcc!dual!ptsfa!hoptoad!amdahl!nsc!saber!phil
From: phil@saber.UUCP (Phil Gustafson)
Newsgroups: net.text,net.unix
Subject: Re: Use of ``vi'' for business office word-processing
Message-ID: <2048@saber.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 30-Sep-86 17:53:30 EDT
Article-I.D.: saber.2048
Posted: Tue Sep 30 17:53:30 1986
Date-Received: Thu, 2-Oct-86 21:06:42 EDT
References: <1246@kitty.UUCP> <141@rayssd.UUCP> <2433@phri.UUCP>, <2046@saber.UUCP> <7154@utzoo.UUCP>
Organization: Saber Technology, San Jose, CA
Lines: 28
Xref: mnetor net.text:1030 net.unix:5726

> > [Me]
> > Security is another important issue.  Much clerical data (pay rates, customer
> > lists, job evaluations) is much safer on a floppy disk in a drawer than on a
> > UNIX system.  Only constant vigilance can keep any UNIX system secure, and
> > that vigilance is most unlikely in an office environment.
> 
> [Thoughtful reply, concluding..]
> Actually, only constant vigilance is going to keep anything really secure.
> 				Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology

Most of the examples you cite (locked drawers, hairpins in locks) concern
concerted and deliberiate attempts to breach security.  My original article
was more concerned with the casual snoop.  The average UNIX system is more
likely to have casual pokers-around and security-testers then most OA systems.

Many perceive a big difference between looking in the corners of a file
system and snooping through someone else's desk.  They're the ones I was
writing about.

-- 
---------------------------------------------------------
All opinions except attributed quotations are mine alone.
Satirical comments may not be specifically identified as such.
--
Phil Gustafson			Voice:	(408)435-8600
Saber Technology Corp.
2381 Bering Drive		Mail:	decwrl!sun!saber!phil
San Jose, CA 95131			idi!saber!phil