: Sat 6/29/2002 7:28 PM
To: Richard Amerman
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Software write-protect (Was: Re: [leaf-user] Floppies)
On Sat, 29 Jun 2002, Richard Amerman wrote:
It seems to me that reguardless of what you do to write-protect
From: Jeff Newmiller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Sat 6/29/2002 11:37 PM
Absolutely disagree. Rebooting is a waste of time. If there is a way in,
rebooting does nothing to prevent repetition. If there is not, rebooting
Hi
Jeff Newmiller wrote the following at 08:37 30.06.2002:
On Sat, 29 Jun 2002, Richard Amerman wrote:
All logging should idealy be done off site using a syslog deamon.
Agreed.
The most important thing is not to have a breach and second to fix
weaknesses. In this situation flushing the
Hi Mike,
I followed the threads on hardware-wp. The last
information I read was that you have to do some
SMD soldering to get the write protection feature.
I think that this is not well suited for many
people as you need some soldering experience to
do this.
The last information i got from
On Sun, 2002-06-30 at 05:07, Manfred Schuler wrote:
I followed the threads on hardware-wp. The last
information I read was that you have to do some
SMD soldering to get the write protection feature.
I think that this is not well suited for many
people as you need some soldering experience to
On Sun, 2002-06-30 at 03:50, Erich Titl wrote:
Agreed, but now we have to see how we can stop such a skillful attacker.
How can we protect the RAM disks from someone determined enough to upload
and execut code bytewise. Anyone can fingerprint the IP stack and scan our
system for loopholes.
On 30 Jun 2002, Mike Noyes wrote:
On Sun, 2002-06-30 at 05:07, Manfred Schuler wrote:
[...]
Also I am a little bit astonished as all people
on the list agree that any additional level of
protection is an improvement. But in the discussion
about software-wp people argument as if it
I fail to see any benefit to using software write-protect when hardware
write protect is convenient, easy and fool proof.
Simply move the write protect tab into the protect position and its
done. The only way to unprotect it is to physically move the tab back
to the writable position. That
Hi Frank,
if you can live with the space constraint of a floppy disk
this is the perfect solution and you should use it.
But if for any reason you cannot use a floppy or any other
hardware protected medium, software write-protect is the
next to best solution.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb:
I
How about if you modify tinylogin to email [EMAIL PROTECTED]
everytime the box is logged into???
--
~Lynn Avants
aka Guitarlynn
guitarlynn at users.sourceforge.net
http://leaf.sourceforge.net
If linux isn't the answer, you've probably got the wrong question!
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc:
Subject:RE: Software write-protect (Was: Re: [leaf-user] Floppies)
On Sun, 2002-06-30 at 03:50, Erich Titl wrote:
Agreed, but now we have to see how we can stop such a skillful attacker.
How can we protect the RAM disks from someone determined enough to upload
-Original Message-
From: Mike Noyes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Sun 6/30/2002 7:07 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc:
Subject: RE: Software write-protect (Was: Re: [leaf-user] Floppies)
On Sun, 2002-06-30 at 03:50, Erich Titl wrote:
Agreed, but now we have to see how we can stop
On Sat, 2002-06-29 at 08:34, Mike Noyes wrote:
On Sat, 2002-06-29 at 06:15, Manfred Schuler wrote:
one reason for software write protection is that people using flash/hard
disk at the moment have no other possibilities. And even if it is not
perfect, it is better than nothing.
Manfred,
I
Hi
I believe the security concerns are well understood. But if we have someone
on our doorstep with the ability Charles pointed out, of course he/she will
be able to place some malware on our ram disk. It is not as bad es having
an infected non volatile storage but I believe this attacker
.
Richard Amerman
-Original Message-
From: Erich Titl [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Sat 6/29/2002 2:08 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc:
Subject: Re: Software write-protect (Was: Re: [leaf-user] Floppies
On Sat, 29 Jun 2002, Richard Amerman wrote:
It seems to me that reguardless of what you do to write-protect the
medium, you have to flush (restart) the system regularly to be the
most secure. This would idealy have to be done by some method that is
both independant of the LEAF firewall
-
From: Jeff Newmiller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Sat 6/29/2002 7:28 PM
To: Richard Amerman
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Software write-protect (Was: Re: [leaf-user] Floppies)
On Sat, 29 Jun 2002, Richard Amerman wrote
17 matches
Mail list logo
