On Tuesday 16 January 2007 01:56, Claude Jones wrote: >On Tue January 16 2007 1:40 am, Tim wrote: >> I was being more of a devil's advocate than anything else... But >> going along with what you mention, is more in keeping with what I had >> in mind. >> >> SELinux is about restricting access, not providing more of it. If you >> remove it, you're granting access to more of your system. The real >> question is whether SELinux has a loophole that grants access without >> you knowing about it (lunatic wild conspiracy theory). Unless SELinux >> provides yet another way into your system, removing it doesn't bring >> about any tangible security benefits. >> >> It goes back to one of the original discussions, what *EXACTLY* does >> it do (more than we know about?). If it *only* adds restrictions, >> there's nothing for anybody to worry about. Except, perhaps, for some >> program authors that think that they should be able to read any file >> on the system without restrictions (e.g. your /etc/passwd files, and >> so on, being served out through Apache). > >While, you make cogent points, I think that triggering the discussion > has been useful, nevertheless. However, to simply dismiss the > speculation about back doors as "lunatic wild conspiracy theory" is > off-base. For example, the U.S. government has been fighting tooth and > nail against certain encryption protocols because they would be too > difficult for them to crack. There's much that could be said about > that, I realize, but the idea that they can propose to make certain > kinds of secrecy a criminal enterprise is breathtaking... I realize > that is not the same as a secret back door into everyone's computer, > but it reveals a mentality that is not to be taken lightly... >-- >Claude Jones >Brunswick, MD, USA 3 cheers and a 21 gun salute to Mr. Claude Jones. Claude has the proper level of paranoia to survive, I think I'd like to have him against my back in a scrap. I can't say it any better than my .sig does without getting really, really verbose. The first 2 have been miserable failures over the last 50 years because nobody gives shit about the big picture anymore, and the 3rd's effects are really spotty. If they were effective, a small percentage of Linden Utah would be needing their sunshine piped in already. We need people like Wayne Green, who in a '73 editorial in 1976 related to our 200th anniversary, said that Ben, Thomas, John and George were a bunch of rabble-rousers, but they managed to raise hell and stick a brick under one corner, and that founded the will to bring this country into being as a nation. We don't have anybody in DC today worthy of cutting the grass on their graves, let alone uphold the principles those men held. -- Cheers, Gene "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." -Ed Howdershelt (Author) Yahoo.com and AOL/TW attorneys please note, additions to the above message by Gene Heskett are: Copyright 2007 by Maurice Eugene Heskett, all rights reserved.
