Jim Cornette wrote:
Mike McCarty wrote:
A machine running current SELinux implementation is provably
less secure in some senses than one which is not.
From a very recent security update for httpd.
Update Information:
The Apache HTTP Server did not verify that a process was an
[snip]
And I gave a few examples where running SELinux caused
the machine to be more vulnerable.
[snip]
Just a passing example.
Indeed. Just as passing as the ones I gave. Read what I
wrote above. I put in "in some senses" for a reason.
SELinux improves security in some senses, and reduces it
in some other senses. It also unarguably makes administration
of a machine more complex and involved. Whether the extra
benefit be worth the extra complexity and vulnerabilites
should be a personal decision at present.
Actually, it always will be, I suppose, like running root
with no password. I won't do that, but I've seen some who
do, or who use "root" or "toor" as the root password.
Mike
--
p="p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}";main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}
Oppose globalization and One World Governments like the UN.
This message made from 100% recycled bits.
You have found the bank of Larn.
I can explain it for you, but I can't understand it for you.
I speak only for myself, and I am unanimous in that!
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
