Re: Linux Distribution Recomendation
From: Byron Sonne (blsonne_at_rogers.com)
Date: 03/09/04
- Previous message: pcannon9_at_comcast.net: "Re: GOTOMYPC Corporate?"
- In reply to: Peter Busser: "Re: Linux Distribution Recomendation"
- Next in thread: Markus Schabel: "Re: Linux Distribution Recomendation"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Mon, 08 Mar 2004 18:17:30 -0500 To: Peter Busser <peter@devbox.adamantix.org>, security-basics@securityfocus.com
> Security does not depend on the admin alone. The system can never be more
> secure than the level of security that the underlying software is able to
> provide.
Depends on what you mean by 'underlying'. For instance, the underlying
public telephone network is insecure. But I could convert my speech to
digital data, scramble it using some kind of secure formulae, transmit
it over the line and then have someone decode and regenerate it. Voila!
secure communication over an insecure medium.
But generally you are right; a chain is only as strong as it's weakest link.
> The security of a normal Linux or UNIX system is rather poor.
Subjective. I could argue otherwise... but I'm inclined to agree with
you as most people are generally poor admins of any OS, and succumb far
to easy to the geewhiz-bells-and-lights that they see or are 'told' to
install. Do you really need to run 5 different kinds of instant
messenger clients... and active or HTML content in mail?!?! Hello?!?!
Heck, they'd probably think mail marked 'occupant' was meant just for them.
> UNIX was designed for a benign environment, with friendly users and a trusted administrator.
100% True!
> This environment is completely different from the Internet as we know it today. And
> therefore the security of normal Linux or UNIX systems is not adequate for use
> on the Internet.
That's jumping to conclusions. Thankfully the people that designed (and
continue to design) unix, and clones such as Linux, developed structures
and an architecture that has proven to be rather extensible. Often times
things have been outright replaced or superseded.
You can find crap anywhere, for and in any OS or architecture, but the
situation is never static. Things evolve. Sure some unix flavours and
distros come defaulted to settings where it is implicit that the admin
review and harden the system. Microsoft along with Apple have helped
transition people toward a lazy perspective... the concern of being
cheap and easy to the exclusion of all other concerns has a more
apparent and quicker effect on the bottom line, and anyone who can
install XP or turn on their Mac and connect themselves to the net thinks
they're a computer expert now. You are never more vulnerable then when
you think you are most secure ;)
I'd put money on the table that the same people willing to research and
implement Adamantix would be the same kind of people willing and capable
enough secure any kind of *nix that's out there now ;)
The solution is, and always has been discipline, education and the
desire to do a good job. There is no hope of any kind without those
ingredients.
Regards,
Byron Sonne
-- For Good, return Good. For Evil, return Justice. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ethical Hacking at the InfoSec Institute. Mention this ad and get $545 off any course! All of our class sizes are guaranteed to be 10 students or less to facilitate one-on-one interaction with one of our expert instructors. Attend a course taught by an expert instructor with years of in-the-field pen testing experience in our state of the art hacking lab. Master the skills of an Ethical Hacker to better assess the security of your organization. Visit us at: http://www.infosecinstitute.com/courses/ethical_hacking_training.html ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
- Previous message: pcannon9_at_comcast.net: "Re: GOTOMYPC Corporate?"
- In reply to: Peter Busser: "Re: Linux Distribution Recomendation"
- Next in thread: Markus Schabel: "Re: Linux Distribution Recomendation"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|