[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

standards? was: [POSSIBLE GRAVE SECURITY HOLD]



On Thu, 3 Feb 2000, Thomas Quinot wrote:

> Le 2000-02-02, Michael Stone écrivait :
> 
> > By "unitiated" I mean "not schooled in debian's private method". I don't
> > recall that the mbr program is used universally by linux distributions,
> 
> Exactly. I can even say that I had never heard of any MBR in use
> on PCs that would take care of booting a floppy drive. This is
> simply not the way things are done in the PC universe, except
> in Debian. Such fundamental deviation from industry's common
> practice MUST be documented, if not deprecated in favor of
> compliance to accepted standards.

Even if such "accepted standards" are broken? This argument means that
Linux needs a kernel patch to cause random oopses. We'll have to add GPF
capability to all of our apps as well...

I really don't care one iota what the default is. I might possibly need to
the ability to boot from a floppy on a system that I've hosed and almost
definitely won't be going though the security stuff well enough to keep
someone with unsupervised physical access to my box from doing things I
won't like.

In any case, the lemming argumentation is not a valid defense. Point out
an RFC or a recognized, documented, committeeized standard and you have a
point, but "everybody else does it" doesn't make it a standard.

ciao,

der.hans
-- 
# +++++++++++=================================+++++++++++ #
# The Linux for YOUR Business seminar, Feb 8th in Phoenix #
#           http://www.excelco.com/seminar3.htm           #
#                  der.hans@LuftHans.com                  #
#             http://home.pages.de/~lufthans/             #
#          Science is magic explained. - der.hans         #
# ===========+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++=========== #


Reply to: