maart@cs.vu.nl (Maarten Litmaath) (06/07/89)
salex@grad1.cis.upenn.edu (Scott Alexander) writes: \In article <2698@solo1.cs.vu.nl> maart@cs.vu.nl (Maarten Litmaath) writes: \>jamesa@arabian.Sun.COM (James D. Allen) writes: \>\... Bravo! I'll do an occasional \>\ % chmod 600 Personal_little_black_book \>\ to discourage casual snooping, but I always make /dev/mem and \>\ /dev/disk `rw-r--r--'. If a user wants to write his own improved \>\ `df' or `ps', more power to him. \> \>More power to the user who wants to write his own improved version of `cat' to \>get `Personal_little_black_book' from /dev/disk itself. \... \There is an element that easier security makes it easier to break in, but \there's also an element that more strenuous security makes it more fun \to break in. As such, I've always been a fan of weaker security and \very strong administrative action against anyone who breaks the implicit \trust. That's allright in YOUR nice little world; the DEFAULT should be AS MUCH SECURITY AS POSSIBLE: 1) to guard one's privacy 2) to protect the user/system from MISTAKES -- "Your password [should be] like your |Maarten Litmaath @ VU Amsterdam: toothbrush." (Don Alvarez) |maart@cs.vu.nl, mcvax!botter!maart