🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <terryk.711987309@cc.gatech.edu> terryk@terminus.gatech.edu (Terry Kane) writes:
>
>Orange book ratings used in general computing are overkill.
>Basically, I think that non-defense users are looking at two or three
>categories: unsecure and generally secure.  The protection that's
>desired is protection against malicious or ignorant attacks on the
>integrity of the system.  ACLs on the file system and device drivers
>provide this, and ACLs are provided at the C2 level.
>
>Hence - I want C2 from my operating system.  I'll provide physical
>security, and if anybody wants to steal my data by monitoring
>electromagnetic emissions - Hey, more power to 'em.

Sorry to disappoint, but C2 does not requires ACL's for devices.  That
is a B1 feature.  C2 is the _minimal_ level of security that provides
even a reasonable level of security in the face of an attack.  

Nevertheless, your point about orange book ratings typically being
overkill is correct.  Even something as "wimpy" as C2 can be extremely
limiting in a shared computing environment.  Unfortunately, Msoft is
setting up NT as being a replacement for server-type OS's at large
sites.  As a result, I guess they felt that they would have to make
some noise about security issues to sound like they knew what they
were doing.  However, they started saying C2 before they apparently
knew what was involved, then backpedaled on it saying that the government
(NCSC) was moving too slowly.  Given that the pre-beta SDK just shipped
doesn't even include the filesystem, we can all tell who didn't have
their act together.

It seems that security in the orange book sense doesn't make much sense
for most folks however.  It focuses on things like loss or alteration
of information.  While these things are certainly important, for most
non-military related systems, attacks (malicious or inadvertant) that
result in denial of service are just as important.

Cheers,

David Boles