Article View: comp.security.misc
Article #913Re: Future OS virus immunity.
From: Jerry M. Carlin
Date: Mon, 04 Jan 1993 16:39
Date: Mon, 04 Jan 1993 16:39
22 lines
1543 bytes
1543 bytes
In article <1993Jan3.023308.25376@Princeton.EDU> mfterman@phoenix.princeton.edu (Mutant for Hire) writes: >... but you have to really be careful >about programs that run setuid, protections on all files, and other such >issues. > >... I do wonder how much more secure >other OS's are, where the ability to keep a security hole quiet is a bit >easier. Tandam Guardian has 'progid' which is morally equivalent to setuid. MVS has something like 'privileged libraries'. In fact, every operating system has some form of privilege mechanism and this mechanism is subject to the universal problem of incorrect administration. There is no such thing as a 100%, completely secure system outside of the one described in the FAQ (buried in concrete etc) so UNIX is as good as (or as bad as) all the others that actually have security mechanisms (MVS, Tandem Guardian, VMS etc). MS-DOS & Mac OS are another matter since you don't even have file protection that's worth anything. -- Jerry M. Carlin (510) 823-2441 jmcarli@srv.pacbell.com Alchemical Engineer and Virtual Realist
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<1993Jan4.163918.11360@PacBell.COM>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!gatech!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!agate!ames!pacbell.com!jmcarliReferences:
<eronald.726016050@ruble> <1993Jan3.023308.25376@Princeton.EDU>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Newsgroups: comp.security.misc Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!gatech!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!agate!ames!pacbell.com!jmcarli From: jmcarli@srv.PacBell.COM (Jerry M. Carlin) Subject: Re: Future OS virus immunity. Message-ID: <1993Jan4.163918.11360@PacBell.COM> Sender: news@PacBell.COM (Pacific Bell Netnews) Organization: Pacific * Bell References: <eronald.726016050@ruble> <1993Jan3.023308.25376@Princeton.EDU> Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 16:39:18 GMT Lines: 22