[comp.virus] Secure UNIX

morgan@ms.uky.edu (Wes Morgan) (07/03/90)

m19940@mwvm.mitre.org (Emily H. Lonsford) writes:

>To me, the worst problem is with UNIX's root account; there it's all or
>nothing when it comes to privileges.  There's no such thing as "separation of
>duties."  And so far the "more secure" versions of UNIX really haven't
>addressed that.

AT&T has a product called "System V/MLS" (Multi-Level Security), which
they released in 1989.  Reading from the product announcement, I see that
System V/MLS was certified at the B1 security level by the NCSC.  It is
configurable at C1, C2, and B1 levels.  System V/MLS is available (at least
at initial release) for the 3B2/500 and 3B2/600 computers; I'd be surprised
if AT&T hasn't ported it further up the product line.  There is also a
windowing terminal that maintains a B3 trusted path to the security kernel.
They also have a suite of trusted RFC networking utilities.

After reading the Orange Book, I'm reasonably sure that AT&T has achieved
the "separation of duties" to which Emily refers.

I haven't used this product, nor have I read any reviews; I just know
what I read in the literature.

Wes

- --
    | Wes Morgan, not speaking for | {any major site}!ukma!ukecc!morgan |
    | the University of Kentucky's |        morgan@engr.uky.edu         |
    | Engineering Computing Center |   morgan%engr.uky.edu@UKCC.BITNET  |
     Lint is the compiler's only means of dampening the programmer's ego.