On 4/4/06, Chris Rijk <chris at aceshardware.com> wrote:
>
> Going even further would be to integrate overall package mangament
> with security settings for them and things like security alerts. Many>
> security alerts aren't very useful in terms of what sys-admin should
> do. "Wait for a patch and disable program if possible in the meantime"
> isn't that handy. For example, if a vulnerability depends on a
> buffer-overflow attack but you have an UltraSPARC chip or an x86
> chip with NX-bit support then such attacks *may* be rendered useless -
> would be nice to get a security alert from Solaris along the lines of "You
> have XYZ installed but because you have anti-stack cracking support
> active, you don't have to worry about this vulnerability". In other cases,
> the following would be interesting too: "The current application suffers
> from this security vulnerability. There are no known exploits currently
> available but it is recommended that you disable this program until a
> patch is available. If this program is needed, then in the meantime, the
> following list of PRM setting changes can be made to reduce the scope
> for damage in case of an attack - see this web-page for more information".

This seems to be going the same direction I was going with "Optional Modules"
I proposed as possibly being useful with fault management.

http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?forumID=49&threadID=3214

This particular type of "fault management" would really be more of
risk management, which seems to be what predictive self-healing is
all about.  In this case, it would be just optional self-diagnosis.

Mike

--
Mike Gerdts
http://mgerdts.blogspot.com/

Reply via email to