Agreed and thats why the NSA created their secure linux distro, to implement ACL's, an important function missing from current linux distro's security.
> From: Steve Brorens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: 2002/03/13 Wed AM 10:41:26 GMT+12:00 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: Why Linux won't suffer from viruses like Windows/Outlook > > Far more granular for one, but the most obvious from an admin perspective is that it >easily allows me to setup this sort of thing: > > d:\data\payroll > Group/Managers has ReadOnly access > Group/Payclerks has Change access > (and TheGreatUnwashed have absolutly no access) > > ... basically I can add an ACL entry for each group that needs some sort of access, >and define this access level. > > > > - a "default install" of Linux from most distros is not > > particularly secure > > > > Compared to what ? > > Compared to what everyone on this list would consider adequate. Surely the existence >of Bastille and the near universal advice to 'harden' your system asap after >installation are proof enough. I'll grant that MS do an even worse job, but that's >not the point. > > > I hope not. In fact i have friends whose machines i have not > > even given them the root password to. They just use it. > > If you think about it this probably proves several of my points... > > - steve > > > ========================================================= > http://www.commarc.co.nz > > (This e-mail has been scanned by MailMarshal) >
