[2119] in RedHat Linux List
Re: Is "linux single" a security concern?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jeff Buck)
Thu Oct 31 18:06:06 1996
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 14:55:55 -0800 (PST)
From: Jeff Buck <jeffb@pegasus.usmicro.net>
To: redhat-list@redhat.com
In-Reply-To: <199610312153.OAA03844@amphlem.corp.apple.com>
Resent-From: redhat-list@redhat.com
Reply-To: redhat-list@redhat.com
On Thu, 31 Oct 1996, Eric S. Pulley wrote:
>
> >I booted my box to try out the "linux single" lilo option, and I'm concerned
> >that the resulting unprotected root shell is a fairly serious security
> >concern.
> >
> >Not all machines can be physically secured (e.g. in a large office building,
> >perhaps) and it seems that it would be a trivial way to gain root access to
> >any Linux box.
> >
> Yes this is a security hole but it can be fixed somewhat with a password=
> line in you lilo.conf. which will cause lilo to have a password
>
When you get right down to it though, there is always a way around.... No
machine will be "totally secure" unless it is physically secure. Even if
everything is encrypted, and the machine isn't physically secure, that
still doesn't prevent a person from destroying everything in it on a whim.
-Jeff
--
PLEASE read the Red Hat FAQ, Tips, Errata and the MAILING LIST ARCHIVES!
________________________________________________________________________
http://www.redhat.com/RedHat-FAQ http://www.redhat.com/RedHat-Errata
http://www.redhat.com/RedHat-Tips http://www.redhat.com/mailing-lists
------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe: mail -s unsubscribe redhat-list-request@redhat.com < /dev/null
