tvf@cci632.UUCP (Tom Frauenhofer) (10/31/90)
In article <1830@overlf.UUCP> emanuele@overlf.UUCP (Mark A. Emanuele) writes: >In article <41491@cci632.UUCP>, tvf@cci632.UUCP (Tom Frauenhofer) writes: ...on a discussion of UNIX OS's on 80x86 machines allowing CTL-ALT-DEL to reboot the system >> I could do this under Microport V/AT (in fact, the friendly folks at >> Microport actually wrote in their documentation that that was the preferred > ^^^^^^^^^ > ||||||||| >> way to do a shutdown). > >I can't see how this could possibly be a PREFERRED method to do this. Nonetheless, that's what their book said, along with much gab about how good their file hardening was. Note that I didn't offer editorial comment on whether that being the PREFERRED way was good or not (for the record I DON'T think it should be preferred), but given my scenario (pretty much a single-user system 99% of the time), and given half a dozen sync's, it seemed to be adequate (I never lost a file). On a serious multi-user system it wouldn't be so hot, but on most serious multi-user systems that I'm familiar with, they also have single switches/buttons that could bring down the system Real Fast (including hardware resets on 80x86 machines). Is there a moral? Is Elmer Fudd a dolt? No, but there is a moral: if you want a system to be foolproof, you have a rich fantasy life that I'd like to share (god, how Alt.Personals of me! :-) ). -- Thomas V. Frauenhofer, WA2YYW, tvf@cci.com | Little cockroach on the wall, {uupsi,ccicpg}!cci632!tvf@uunet.uu.net | Don't you have no friends at all? tvf@frau.UUCP | Doesn't anybody love you? tvf1477@ma.cs.rit.edu | God will love you! (SQUISH)
mju@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us (Marc Unangst) (11/02/90)
tvf@cci632.UUCP (Tom Frauenhofer) writes: > On a serious multi-user system it wouldn't be so hot, but on most serious > multi-user systems that I'm familiar with, they also have single > switches/buttons that could bring down the system Real Fast (including > hardware resets on 80x86 machines). Most serious multi-user systems also have locking panels that cover switches that bring the system down Real Fast, because bringing the system down Real Fast is not usually a Desirable Thing to Do, Especially By Accident. Most serious multi-user systems are also kept in locked closets or restricted-access computer rooms, not sitting under the sysadmin's desk. -- Marc Unangst | mju@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us | "Bus error: passengers dumped" ...!umich!leebai!mudos!mju |
tvf@cci632.UUCP (Tom Frauenhofer) (11/02/90)
In article <D4NZR1w163w@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us> mju@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us (Marc Unangst) writes: >tvf@cci632.UUCP (Tom Frauenhofer) writes: >> On a serious multi-user system it wouldn't be so hot, but on most serious >> multi-user systems that I'm familiar with, they also have single >> switches/buttons that could bring down the system Real Fast (including >> hardware resets on 80x86 machines). > >Most serious multi-user systems also have locking panels that cover >switches that bring the system down Real Fast, because bringing the >system down Real Fast is not usually a Desirable Thing to Do, >Especially By Accident. Bet you if I took you to a lot of sites that use Most Serious Systems you'd see how unprotected they really are. I just checked our couputer labs. No keylocks on the sun servers. The VAX keylock doesn't protect you from the Real Nasty switches. The Tahoes we have keylocks, but the sysadmins have left the keys in them. I've been to many other sites, seen gobs of different hardware, if this was uncommon I wouldn't be wasting my breath here (big companies, small companies, universities, computer vendors, etc.). One company lost a room full of computers (about 20, I'd say, all reasonably sized systems) because a visitor pressed a red button near the door. He mistook it for the door open switch, it was clearly marked as an emergency powerdown switch. >Most serious multi-user systems are also kept in locked closets or >restricted-access computer rooms, not sitting under the sysadmin's >desk. Chuckle. Were that it was true. Only when serious multi-user systems are treated seriously. -- Thomas V. Frauenhofer, WA2YYW, tvf@cci.com | Little cockroach on the wall, {uupsi,ccicpg}!cci632!tvf@uunet.uu.net | Don't you have no friends at all? tvf@frau.UUCP | Doesn't anybody love you? tvf1477@ma.cs.rit.edu | God will love you! (SQUISH)