[comp.sys.amiga.advocacy] Multiuser without hard memory protection? Just say NO!

peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) (04/21/91)

In article <71827@microsoft.UUCP> davidbro@microsoft.UUCP (Dave BROWN) writes:
> I hate to say it, but the High Performance File System under OS/2 does this.
> Mind you, it implements this for upward compatibility with LANs, but the
> support for Access Control Lists and file ownership is there.

OK. In OS/2 any program can go into supervisor mode and do anything. ACLs
and the like are simply advisory in this environment. They don't really
provide any protection.

We have a PC net at work, and a UNIX net. We will not let any PCs on the
UNIX net unless they're in a location with physical access protection (card
key access to the room). I realise someone could steal a card, but it's a
little harder to do that inconspicuously.

We also don't have Workstations on the UNIX net unless there's no unprotected
escape to single-user mode, for the same reason.

> Unix supports something KIND of like this, with the "sticky bit."

Modern UNIX supports real shared libraries. It needs them, to avoid even more
kernel bloat. Backwards compatibility... sigh.

Maybe OSF-2 will fix this? :->
-- 
Peter da Silva.   `-_-'
<peter@sugar.hackercorp.com>.