Haai,

On Fri, June 29, 2007 21:22, Wraukon the Excellent wrote:
> On 6/29/07, De Zeurkous <zeurkous@nichten.info> wrote:
>> Haai,
>>
>> Back to the topic of security, the current UNIX security system
>> desperately needs an overhaul. Simple lusers and groups specified by a
>> sysadmin are not enough. It must be possible to both form groups of,
>> exchange allocated resources between, and (temporarely) split lusers
>> without admin intervention. The latter will eliminate many potential
>> security problems both in general and in the implementation of
>> microkernels.
>
> It's funny, the "security" model of UNIX was one of the things I liked
> about it.
> Made it seem less MiB/NSA/BigBrother -like.

Heh, agreed. That's why I'm simply proposing some extensions to the
current model, and specifically avoided mentioning ACLs, since the latter
tends to result in unhealty levels of paranoia.

>
> Also, your spellchecker (whether manual, subconscious or automatic) seems
> to be mis-correcting the word "user". :)

On the verge between the manual and the subconcious :) Anyway, it's an
ironic reference to how badly even the most profound developers behave
when restrained in a user role.

>
> This is starting to get a bit far field, so I think I'm done for now
> -- I think anything else we
> toss out would be better suited to an offline discussion.

Hm, in theory it would be useful to re-evaluate the somewhat static design
methodology of the kernel -- but perhaps you're right.

Baai,

De Zeurkous
-----------

Friggin' Machines!

>
> --*greywolf;
>