Re: [SC-L] Opinion re an interesting article on Linux security in Linux Journal

2004-03-10 Thread Richard Moore
Michal Zalewski wrote: Uhh, with some new worms, you not only can't execute the rogue directly by just clicking on an attachment, but you need to enter a password to get access to it... you just need a userbase clueless enough to carry out even a fairly complicated action out of curiosity, and

Re: [SC-L] Opinion re an interesting article on Linux security in Linux Journal

2004-03-10 Thread Ryan Russell
Kenneth R. van Wyk wrote: I think that we're seeing several of the features that have plagued the security of desktop Windows systems being increasingly incorporated into the desktops of Linux systems. Further, the Linux desktop is truly maturing and, along with that, we're getting closer and

RE: [SC-L] Opinion re an interesting article on Linux security in Linux Journal

2004-03-10 Thread Alun Jones
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Michal Zalewski Sent: Tuesday, March 09, 2004 1:16 PM Uhh, with some new worms, you not only can't execute the rogue directly by just clicking on an attachment, but you need to enter a password

[SC-L] Re: Application Sandboxing, communication limiting, etc.

2004-03-10 Thread ljknews
At 11:14 AM -0700 3/10/04, Jared W. Robinson wrote: Seems to me that the average user application doesn't need to open TCP/UDP ports for listening. Fixed in a previous major protocol stack. Doing the equivalent on DECnet requires privilege.