-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Stewart Stremler wrote:
> It's trivial to refute in the multi-user or network-server case. But > that's not the constraints. Much of the vocal Linux community, unable > to come up with an air-holding answer, resort to either name-calling, > or they change the constraints to suit their preferred answer. I still contend that even on a single user system it is useful to protect the OS. Not only so you don't have to go to the hassle of reinstalling it but a lot of OS corruptions can lead to end user data loss. If an attacker is messing with the kernel who knows what damage he might intentionally or inadvertantly cause. But since you seem unhappy with any argument put forth along those lines I think I must ultimately contend that nobody really runs a single user system. Every wants some services and most every computer is going to be in a multi-person household situation where they will have the ability to trash each others data. What typical end user hasn't fired up a P2P app these days? >>I think he's been pretty clear. Maybe a bit too subtle or even a bit >>sly, but clear nonetheless to anyone who's has been paying attention. > > I've _tried_ to be clear. > > I've not tried to be sly. > > But now I find I've been accused of subtlety. It seemed you were rather cagey (You subtle and cagey! so there!:) about whether you yourself would ever do work as root. Then you eventually suggested that you might if you were the only user and were not running any services. It was not clear if you were simply playing devils advocate or whether it was your real opinion. People get uneasy when someone might seem to be playing devils advocate but do not specifically say that they are because then they do not know whether to allow themselves to be swayed by your arguments (thus admitting they were initially incorrect) only to have you make your true opinion known at the end with an even better reason thus having to admit they were yet again incorrect. One could say they should hold firm to their convictions but there is a fine line between conviction and stubborn and one should always be open to changing their opinion given good reasons. At least that's how I see it. Playing devils advocate is fine but if one is going to do that they should come clean with it in the beginning. - -- Tracy R Reed http://[EMAIL PROTECTED] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFCZyEV9PIYKZYVAq0RAhqPAJ9vQnKAgRDNts9vJfPgh4dmCwu0LQCfSw7M oXUzBdLfvpIvAe9+PkNmqNQ= =gd/F -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
