On Wed, 2012-03-07 at 11:05 -0800, Scott Doty wrote:
/etc/polkit-1/localauthority.conf.d/60-desktop-policy.conf
Regarding this situation: turns out that if system-config-printer
doesn't establish proper contact with cups-pk-helper, it will fall back
to a mode that pops up the root password
On Thu, 2012-03-08 at 15:37 +0100, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
On Thu, Mar 8, 2012 at 10:33 AM, Tim Waugh twa...@redhat.com wrote:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Privilege_escalation_policy
...except that the primary author of that document told me this month
that it is only a draft and can
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 5:58 AM, Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com wrote:
On Mar 5, 2012, at 8:37 PM, Chuck Anderson wrote:
On Mon, Mar 05, 2012 at 08:35:11PM -0700, Chris Murphy wrote:
passwd keeps complaining The password fails the dictionary check -
it is too simplistic for fake words
On 03/05/2012 07:13 AM, Scott Doty wrote:
On 03/02/2012 04:16 AM, Tim Waugh wrote:
Yes, it's a policy.
Also see this bug which I filed nearly two years ago on just this
subject:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=596711
Tim.
*/
New bug report filed: security policy: root
On Mar 7, 2012, at 6:29 AM, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
UNIX didn't have these defaults originally; they were added in the
90's only after real-world experience has shown that these policies
are necessary (and they have been pretty much unchanged for the last
10-15 years, AFAIK).
It's a
On Sat, 2012-03-03 at 15:46 -0800, Scott Doty wrote:
On 03/03/2012 03:22 PM, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
On Sun, Mar 4, 2012 at 12:03 AM, Scott Dotysc...@ponzo.net wrote:
How about allowing all printer management of local printers (including
adding a network printer, as Linus his daughter were
On 03/02/2012 04:16 AM, Tim Waugh wrote:
Yes, it's a policy.
Also see this bug which I filed nearly two years ago on just this
subject:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=596711
Tim.
*/
New bug report filed: security policy: root password needed when it
shouldn't be.
On Sat, 2012-03-03 at 14:07 -0500, David Zeuthen wrote:
On Fri, 2012-03-02 at 08:42 -0600, Greg Swift wrote:
I experience a similar scenario. On my home system (f16) I have my
wife and both in the wheel group. Every time I go to run
virt-manager
I get prompted for her password. I
On Sat, 2012-03-03 at 15:10 -0700, Chris Murphy wrote:
Depends. What if what's being added is a remote printer, that's merely
a way to smuggle documents out of a company? So direct attach printers
are probably fair game for adding without authentication. The user
clearly has physical access
passwd keeps complaining The password fails the dictionary check - it is too
simplistic for fake words NOT in the dictionary but otherwise too simple for
passwd's approval system.
I'm using the F17 alpha LiveCD and I'm just testing. I want a SIMPLE password
and it won't let me use anything I
On Mon, Mar 05, 2012 at 08:35:11PM -0700, Chris Murphy wrote:
passwd keeps complaining The password fails the dictionary check -
it is too simplistic for fake words NOT in the dictionary but
otherwise too simple for passwd's approval system.
I think you can just ignore passwd's warning in this
On Mar 5, 2012, at 8:37 PM, Chuck Anderson wrote:
On Mon, Mar 05, 2012 at 08:35:11PM -0700, Chris Murphy wrote:
passwd keeps complaining The password fails the dictionary check -
it is too simplistic for fake words NOT in the dictionary but
otherwise too simple for passwd's approval system.
On 03/03/2012 03:32 PM, Scott Doty wrote:
On 03/02/2012 04:16 AM, Tim Waugh wrote:
Yes, it's a policy.
Also see this bug which I filed nearly two years ago on just this
subject:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=596711
Tim.
*/
They closed it as an upstream bug. Then
Hi,
- Original Message -
On Fri, 2012-03-02 at 08:42 -0600, Greg Swift wrote:
I experience a similar scenario. On my home system (f16) I have my
wife and both in the wheel group. Every time I go to run
virt-manager
I get prompted for her password. I do believe she is first in
Adam Williamson wrote:
On Fri, 2012-03-02 at 10:18 -0500, Matthias Clasen wrote:
On Thu, 2012-03-01 at 21:53 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
In case anyone's wondering what that actually does, here's what I can
figure out.
What it does directly is to add the user to the 'wheel'
On Mar 3, 2012, at 1:00 PM, Neal Becker wrote:
Here's one part of the principle:
I. The ONLY reason for re-auth is to prevent trojans/web attacks.
This implies
- Don't ask for re-auth for an action that isn't really potentially harmful
(e.g., adding a printer)
Depends. What if
On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 11:10 PM, Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com wrote:
On Mar 3, 2012, at 1:00 PM, Neal Becker wrote:
- Don't ask for re-auth for an action that isn't really potentially harmful
(e.g., adding a printer)
Depends. What if what's being added is a remote printer, that's
On 03/02/2012 03:21 AM, Conan Kudo (ニール・ゴンパ) wrote:
For printers, currently installing printers does not require superuser
privileges, but managing those printers installed by that user does.
Is it possible to make it so that printers installed by that user can
be managed by the user
On 03/03/2012 02:19 PM, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 11:10 PM, Chris Murphyli...@colorremedies.com wrote:
On Mar 3, 2012, at 1:00 PM, Neal Becker wrote:
- Don't ask for re-auth for an action that isn't really potentially harmful
(e.g., adding a printer)
Depends. What if
On Mar 3, 2012, at 3:19 PM, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
A complete lockdown to prevent transferring data out of the system is
a much harder problem (even if you only allow users to run a web
browser, they may use it to send data to a server).
Yeah, you're right, I can just open a gmail or dropbox
On Sun, Mar 4, 2012 at 12:03 AM, Scott Doty sc...@ponzo.net wrote:
How about allowing all printer management of local printers (including
adding a network printer, as Linus his daughter were dealing with) with
two factors:
1) user password
2) physical access
...because PolKit already
On 03/02/2012 04:16 AM, Tim Waugh wrote:
On Fri, 2012-03-02 at 05:21 -0600, Conan Kudo (ニール・ゴンパ) wrote:
For printers, currently installing printers does not require superuser
privileges, but managing those printers installed by that user does.
Is it possible to make it so that printers
On 03/03/2012 03:22 PM, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
On Sun, Mar 4, 2012 at 12:03 AM, Scott Dotysc...@ponzo.net wrote:
How about allowing all printer management of local printers (including
adding a network printer, as Linus his daughter were dealing with) with
two factors:
1) user password
2)
On 03/03/2012 11:07 AM, David Zeuthen wrote:
Hi,
- Original Message -
On Fri, 2012-03-02 at 08:42 -0600, Greg Swift wrote:
This sounds pretty straightforwardly like a bug probably in
PolicyKit, to me. It's obviously more correct to use the current
user's authorization if it's
On Mar 1, 2012, at 10:53 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Thu, 2012-03-01 at 17:43 -0500, Adam Jackson wrote:
On Thu, 2012-03-01 at 16:39 -0500, Daniel J Walsh wrote:
I believe Fedora 17 has an add user to admin group checkbox when
adding the initial user, not sure if it is checked on or off
On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 2:12 AM, Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.comwrote:
On Mar 1, 2012, at 10:53 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Thu, 2012-03-01 at 17:43 -0500, Adam Jackson wrote:
On Thu, 2012-03-01 at 16:39 -0500, Daniel J Walsh wrote:
I believe Fedora 17 has an add user to admin
Here is a weird example of how Fedora currenty handles some permission
procedures. I created a standard user account (no admin rights) and I'm
trying to install a package. When I press apply I'm prompted to enter a
password. Since I have no admin rights I would expect to be asked for the
root
On Fri, 2012-03-02 at 05:21 -0600, Conan Kudo (ニール・ゴンパ) wrote:
For printers, currently installing printers does not require superuser
privileges, but managing those printers installed by that user does.
Is it possible to make it so that printers installed by that user can
be managed by the
Daniel J Walsh wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 02/29/2012 04:03 PM, Scott Doty wrote:
On 02/29/2012 08:46 AM, David Malcolm wrote:
On Wed, 2012-02-29 at 07:02 -0500, Neal Becker wrote:
I think he's got a point
On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 05:36, Nikos Roussos ni...@autoverse.net wrote:
Here is a weird example of how Fedora currenty handles some permission
procedures. I created a standard user account (no admin rights) and I'm
trying to install a package. When I press apply I'm prompted to enter a
On Thu, 2012-03-01 at 21:53 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
In case anyone's wondering what that actually does, here's what I can
figure out.
What it does directly is to add the user to the 'wheel' group. I'm not
sure what all the consequences of that are, but there's two I've been
able to
On Thu, 2012-03-01 at 20:49 -0500, Daniel J Walsh wrote:
On 03/01/2012 05:43 PM, Adam Jackson wrote:
On Thu, 2012-03-01 at 16:39 -0500, Daniel J Walsh wrote:
I believe Fedora 17 has an add user to admin group checkbox when
adding the initial user, not sure if it is checked on or off by
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/02/2012 10:38 AM, Sérgio Basto wrote:
On Thu, 2012-03-01 at 20:49 -0500, Daniel J Walsh wrote:
On 03/01/2012 05:43 PM, Adam Jackson wrote:
On Thu, 2012-03-01 at 16:39 -0500, Daniel J Walsh wrote:
I believe Fedora 17 has an add user to
On 03/02/2012 06:59 AM, Neal Becker wrote:
I believe Fedora 17 has an add user to admin group checkbox when
adding the initial user, not sure if it is checked on or off by default.
Actually, FC16 has this feature (and I use it). But this is sometimes even more
confusing. Does that dialog
On Feb 29, 2012, at 9:18 AM, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Feb 29, 2012, at 7:08 AM, Nikos Roussos wrote:
Why not add by default the first user created (right after installation
finishes) to administrative group and disable the root account?
This is, is fact, how Apple has done things
Hi, regarding this problem (polkit asks you for the password of
another user), I have filled this bug report
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=799480
I have hit this problem myself in several computers.
Regards, Sergio
2012/3/2 Greg Swift xa...@fedoraproject.org:
On Fri, Mar 2, 2012
On Mar 2, 2012, at 10:26 AM, Kevin Wright wrote:
On Feb 29, 2012, at 9:18 AM, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Feb 29, 2012, at 7:08 AM, Nikos Roussos wrote:
Why not add by default the first user created (right after installation
finishes) to administrative group and disable the root account?
ons 2012-02-29 klockan 17:51 -0500 skrev Simo Sorce:
That said I understand your pain and the realize the current solution is
not ideal for the casual user. Maybe we should have 2 security profiles
(lax and strict) that you can choose at install time so that people can
choose what they like
On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 8:42 AM, Greg Swift xa...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 05:36, Nikos Roussos ni...@autoverse.net wrote:
Here is a weird example of how Fedora currenty handles some permission
procedures. I created a standard user account (no admin rights) and I'm
On Fri, 2012-03-02 at 08:42 -0600, Greg Swift wrote:
On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 05:36, Nikos Roussos ni...@autoverse.net
wrote:
Here is a weird example of how Fedora currenty handles some
permission procedures. I created a standard user account (no
admin rights) and I'm
On Fri, 2012-03-02 at 10:18 -0500, Matthias Clasen wrote:
On Thu, 2012-03-01 at 21:53 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
In case anyone's wondering what that actually does, here's what I can
figure out.
What it does directly is to add the user to the 'wheel' group. I'm not
sure what
On Fri, 2012-03-02 at 09:34 -0700, Nathanael D. Noblet wrote:
On 03/02/2012 06:59 AM, Neal Becker wrote:
I believe Fedora 17 has an add user to admin group checkbox when
adding the initial user, not sure if it is checked on or off by default.
Actually, FC16 has this feature (and I use
On Fri, 2012-03-02 at 18:45 +0100, Sergio Pascual wrote:
Hi, regarding this problem (polkit asks you for the password of
another user), I have filled this bug report
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=799480
I have hit this problem myself in several computers.
So if you follow
On 03/02/2012 02:41 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Fri, 2012-03-02 at 09:34 -0700, Nathanael D. Noblet wrote:
On 03/02/2012 06:59 AM, Neal Becker wrote:
I believe Fedora 17 has an add user to admin group checkbox when
adding the initial user, not sure if it is checked on or off by default.
On Fri, 2012-03-02 at 14:51 -0700, Nathanael D. Noblet wrote:
On 03/02/2012 02:41 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Fri, 2012-03-02 at 09:34 -0700, Nathanael D. Noblet wrote:
On 03/02/2012 06:59 AM, Neal Becker wrote:
I believe Fedora 17 has an add user to admin group checkbox when
adding the
On Wed, 29.02.12 18:27, Simo Sorce (s...@redhat.com) wrote:
On Thu, 2012-03-01 at 00:17 +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Wed, 29.02.12 17:51, Simo Sorce (s...@redhat.com) wrote:
On Wed, 2012-02-29 at 10:09 -0700, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Feb 29, 2012, at 5:15 AM, drago01 wrote:
On Thu, Mar 01, 2012 at 03:11:53PM +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote:
Also you should really define 'You' here. Because the issue is that mDNS
in Fedora is inserted by default in the hosts database and IIRC before
DNS, so it get a chance to always reply before a DNS query is made. This
of
On Thu, 01.03.12 15:16, Tomasz Torcz (to...@pipebreaker.pl) wrote:
On Thu, Mar 01, 2012 at 03:11:53PM +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote:
Also you should really define 'You' here. Because the issue is that mDNS
in Fedora is inserted by default in the hosts database and IIRC before
DNS, so
On Thu, 2012-03-01 at 16:39 -0500, Daniel J Walsh wrote:
I believe Fedora 17 has an add user to admin group checkbox when
adding the initial user, not sure if it is checked on or off by default.
Off by default (having just tried it today).
- ajax
signature.asc
Description: This is a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/01/2012 05:43 PM, Adam Jackson wrote:
On Thu, 2012-03-01 at 16:39 -0500, Daniel J Walsh wrote:
I believe Fedora 17 has an add user to admin group checkbox when
adding the initial user, not sure if it is checked on or off by
default.
Giovanni Campagna wrote:
PS: it would be useful to have some GUI tool to configure PolicyKit.
Everytime I clean my system I have to dig through dozens of manual
pages just to get virt-manager without a password for my user.
On Wed, 2012-02-29 at 11:46 -0500, David Malcolm wrote:
On Wed, 2012-02-29 at 07:02 -0500, Neal Becker wrote:
I think he's got a point
http://www.osnews.com/story/25659/Torvalds_requiring_root_password_for_mundane_things_is_quot_moronic_quot_
On Thu, 2012-03-01 at 17:43 -0500, Adam Jackson wrote:
On Thu, 2012-03-01 at 16:39 -0500, Daniel J Walsh wrote:
I believe Fedora 17 has an add user to admin group checkbox when
adding the initial user, not sure if it is checked on or off by default.
Off by default (having just tried it
I think he's got a point
http://www.osnews.com/story/25659/Torvalds_requiring_root_password_for_mundane_things_is_quot_moronic_quot_
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 1:02 PM, Neal Becker ndbeck...@gmail.com wrote:
I think he's got a point
http://www.osnews.com/story/25659/Torvalds_requiring_root_password_for_mundane_things_is_quot_moronic_quot_
Yeah but last time we tried this in fedora it got flamefested so we
had to revert.
--
On 02/29/2012 01:15 PM, drago01 wrote:
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 1:02 PM, Neal Beckerndbeck...@gmail.com wrote:
I think he's got a point
http://www.osnews.com/story/25659/Torvalds_requiring_root_password_for_mundane_things_is_quot_moronic_quot_
Yeah but last time we tried this in fedora it
Il 29 febbraio 2012 13:02, Neal Becker ndbeck...@gmail.com ha scritto:
I think he's got a point
http://www.osnews.com/story/25659/Torvalds_requiring_root_password_for_mundane_things_is_quot_moronic_quot_
FWIW, date/time and network require no authentication (including
system-wide things like
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 7:36 AM, Emanuel Rietveld codehot...@gmail.comwrote:
On 02/29/2012 01:15 PM, drago01 wrote:
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 1:02 PM, Neal Beckerndbeck...@gmail.com wrote:
I think he's got a point
http://www.osnews.com/story/**25659/Torvalds_requiring_root_**
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 01:41:52PM +0100, Giovanni Campagna wrote:
PS: it would be useful to have some GUI tool to configure PolicyKit.
Everytime I clean my system I have to dig through dozens of manual
pages just to get virt-manager without a password for my user.
Once upon a time, there
Hi,
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 12:41 PM, Giovanni Campagna
scampa.giova...@gmail.com wrote:
Il 29 febbraio 2012 13:02, Neal Becker ndbeck...@gmail.com ha scritto:
I think he's got a point
http://www.osnews.com/story/25659/Torvalds_requiring_root_password_for_mundane_things_is_quot_moronic_quot_
On 02/29/2012 07:46 AM, Mark Bidewell wrote:
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 7:36 AM, Emanuel Rietveldcodehot...@gmail.comwrote:
On 02/29/2012 01:15 PM, drago01 wrote:
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 1:02 PM, Neal Beckerndbeck...@gmail.com wrote:
I think he's got a point
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 3:56 PM, Chris Evich cev...@redhat.com wrote:
On 02/29/2012 07:46 AM, Mark Bidewell wrote:
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 7:36 AM, Emanuel Rietveldcodehot...@gmail.com**
wrote:
On 02/29/2012 01:15 PM, drago01 wrote:
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 1:02 PM, Neal
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 7:41 AM, Giovanni Campagna
scampa.giova...@gmail.com wrote:
PS: it would be useful to have some GUI tool to configure PolicyKit.
Everytime I clean my system I have to dig through dozens of manual
pages just to get virt-manager without a password for my user.
On Wed, 29 Feb 2012, drago01 wrote:
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 1:02 PM, Neal Becker ndbeck...@gmail.com wrote:
I think he's got a point
http://www.osnews.com/story/25659/Torvalds_requiring_root_password_for_mundane_things_is_quot_moronic_quot_
Yeah but last time we tried this in fedora it got
On Wed, 2012-02-29 at 07:02 -0500, Neal Becker wrote:
I think he's got a point
http://www.osnews.com/story/25659/Torvalds_requiring_root_password_for_mundane_things_is_quot_moronic_quot_
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/FeaturePolicyKit
in Fedora 8 onwards,
It was revamped in Fedora
On Feb 29, 2012, at 5:15 AM, drago01 wrote:
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 1:02 PM, Neal Becker ndbeck...@gmail.com wrote:
I think he's got a point
http://www.osnews.com/story/25659/Torvalds_requiring_root_password_for_mundane_things_is_quot_moronic_quot_
My example is mDNS being blocked in the
On Feb 29, 2012, at 7:08 AM, Nikos Roussos wrote:
Why not add by default the first user created (right after installation
finishes) to administrative group and disable the root account?
This is, is fact, how Apple has done things circa 1999 with Mac OS X. You can
'su' to root, you can
The original thread on G+
https://plus.google.com/u/0/102150693225130002912/posts/1vyfmNCYpi5
Enjoy.
2012/2/29 David Malcolm dmalc...@redhat.com:
On Wed, 2012-02-29 at 07:02 -0500, Neal Becker wrote:
I think he's got a point
Once upon a time, M A Young m.a.yo...@durham.ac.uk said:
From what I remember permissions were opened up without making it clear
this was happening and without an easy way of putting them back, which
made things very difficult if you had good reasons for the permissions
being locked down.
Nikos Roussos wrote:
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 3:56 PM, Chris Evich cev...@redhat.com wrote:
On 02/29/2012 07:46 AM, Mark Bidewell wrote:
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 7:36 AM, Emanuel Rietveldcodehot...@gmail.com**
wrote:
On 02/29/2012 01:15 PM, drago01 wrote:
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 1:02
On 02/29/2012 08:46 AM, David Malcolm wrote:
On Wed, 2012-02-29 at 07:02 -0500, Neal Becker wrote:
I think he's got a point
http://www.osnews.com/story/25659/Torvalds_requiring_root_password_for_mundane_things_is_quot_moronic_quot_
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/FeaturePolicyKit
in
On Wed, 2012-02-29 at 10:09 -0700, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Feb 29, 2012, at 5:15 AM, drago01 wrote:
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 1:02 PM, Neal Becker ndbeck...@gmail.com wrote:
I think he's got a point
On Feb 29, 2012, at 3:51 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
On Wed, 2012-02-29 at 10:09 -0700, Chris Murphy wrote:
My example is mDNS being blocked in the Firewall by default *and* it
requires a root password to unblocked it. Completely retarded.
Except that mDNS is a real security issue (because
On Wed, 29.02.12 17:51, Simo Sorce (s...@redhat.com) wrote:
On Wed, 2012-02-29 at 10:09 -0700, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Feb 29, 2012, at 5:15 AM, drago01 wrote:
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 1:02 PM, Neal Becker ndbeck...@gmail.com wrote:
I think he's got a point
On Wed, 29.02.12 16:08, Chris Murphy (li...@colorremedies.com) wrote:
On Feb 29, 2012, at 3:51 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
On Wed, 2012-02-29 at 10:09 -0700, Chris Murphy wrote:
My example is mDNS being blocked in the Firewall by default *and* it
requires a root password to unblocked
On Thu, 2012-03-01 at 00:17 +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Wed, 29.02.12 17:51, Simo Sorce (s...@redhat.com) wrote:
On Wed, 2012-02-29 at 10:09 -0700, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Feb 29, 2012, at 5:15 AM, drago01 wrote:
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 1:02 PM, Neal Becker
Il 29 febbraio 2012 23:51, Simo Sorce s...@redhat.com ha scritto:
On Wed, 2012-02-29 at 10:09 -0700, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Feb 29, 2012, at 5:15 AM, drago01 wrote:
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 1:02 PM, Neal Becker ndbeck...@gmail.com wrote:
I think he's got a point
On Thu, 2012-03-01 at 00:51 +0100, Giovanni Campagna wrote:
Il 29 febbraio 2012 23:51, Simo Sorce s...@redhat.com ha scritto:
On Wed, 2012-02-29 at 10:09 -0700, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Feb 29, 2012, at 5:15 AM, drago01 wrote:
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 1:02 PM, Neal Becker
On Thu, 1 Mar 2012, Giovanni Campagna wrote:
The same protections should be used, that is DNSSEC and end-to-end
authentication (SSH, TLS). This still leaves the real mdns area
unprotected, but this is to be expected, and it's just an UI issue
(that could be resolved once network zones land).
79 matches
Mail list logo
