Re: And another one just for fun!
From: do not spam (spam)_at_xivic.prima.de)
Date: 21 Sep 2003 21:36:54 +0200
Dave J <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
>inside of uk.comp.security, 'Mark Crispin' wrote:
>>The entire culture from the mid-1980s until the mid-1990s was very
>>anti-security. Security was considered to be an annoyance that got in the
>>way of doing work, and one which could be discarded in the personal
>>computer revolution. It was a *feature*, not a bug, that a personal
>>computer user was effectively root.
>I still can't understand this thing of blaming the OS for the brain
>failures that allow people to open unknown executables or to view
>exploitable files using a vulnerable viewer (like IE or MS Word).
>I think that the local user being root *is* a feature. It's my
>computer and if I'm sat in front of it then I '0wn' it.
>First thing I do with any system is to smack down the restrictions
>until I always have access to everything on it.
>Why on earth wouldn't I?
Awmegoat! Because you don't want to be the almighty Zeus, who snips
his finger and cities vanish in smoke. And that's because you are
_not_ infallible, and not in 100.0000000% control of what you do. Even
the Pope is considered infallible (by catholics) only when speaking ex
officio. Most of the time you're best off with the restrictions of a
normal user who can't do much damage.
-- The first entry of Sin into the mind occurs when, out of cowardice or conformity or vanity, the Real is replaced by a comforting lie. -- Integritas, Consonantia, Claritas