[96117] in RedHat Linux List
Re: Security for (SOHO) Newbies
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (John Lewis)
Sat Oct 24 08:00:54 1998
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 22:57:05 +0100
From: John Lewis <jayell@mcmail.com>
To: redhat-list@redhat.com
Resent-From: redhat-list@redhat.com
Reply-To: redhat-list@redhat.com
Thomas Ribbrock (Design/DEG) <argathin@iname.com>
replies> To: "redhat-list@redhat.com" <redhat-list@redhat.com>
>
> > What, if anything, should be removed from the system to make it more secure
> > and what sort of modifications should be made to config files for services,
> > protocols etc. I am guessing that the standard installation loaded some files
> > that are really only needed for networking. If netscape is the only interface
> > with the ISP do I need to keep sendmail, pine elm etc that are there by
> > default.
> >
>
> Errm, I wonder if you mix up a few things here... "sendmail" is definitely
> not a program you should use from the command line. It's rather a program
> running in the background/as daemon/on demand whenever mail needs to be
> transferred - not as an end user program. To my knowledge, even Netscape
> uses sendmail to *send* mail (while it may be able to *receive* mail
> directly via pop (don't know enough about imap to say anything about it),
> and even if Netscape is able not to use sendmail, removing sendmail (without
> replacing it with alternative MTA (Mail Transfer Agents) like e.g. qmail)
> would leave you stranded with Netscape (or similar programs), as most other
> MUA (Mail User Agents) rely on an MTA to be installed to send/receive their
> mail.
Hi Thomas
You have cleared up one point here - I cannot get rid of sendmail ;-)
> In addition, I wouldn't regard using sendmail as a step backwards. The way
> Linux works is far more divided into "layers" than e.g. Windoze (don't know
> about OS/2), meaning that you have a working "service level" (for the lack
> of a better word) which takes care of all the low level functions (e.g.
> transferring mail, talking to your ISP, making network connections, etc.pp.)
> and a "user interface level" - that way, you have full choice of options
> when it comes to user interfaces (the lack of whitch is one of the biggest
> drawbacks of 'doze, IMO).
In OS/2 you configure your preferred dialler/mailer programs which just use
sendmail.exe. No need to configure sendmail as such.
> BTW: The whole GUI/CLI thing is a very personal matter - I for one (and
> there are many people like that out there) would regard being forced to use
> a GUI all the time as a step backward, as I can do my tasks a hell of a lot
> faster via CLI, especially when talking about pipes, scripts and the likes -
> although I like a GUI for certain tasks as well.
> As long as Linux gives the choice of both interfaces, I don't see a problem
> here.
>
One thing I do miss about OS/2 is the fact that it is object oriented. Having a
folder on the desktop full of objects which when clicked on open that object in
whatever application, spreadsheet wordprocessor etc seems a logical way to work.
StarOffice seems to work that way too (when I eventually work out its confusing
interface). Pipes scripts etc are probably OK if you understand programming but
I regret that I get totally lost trying to follow what is intended to happen in
something as relatively simple as xinitrc for example.
You might question why I want to use Linux. The answer is a complex mix of
reasons among which are frustration with IBMs attitude to small users, the need
to exercise my failing grey matter, a long held intention of having as little to
do with M$ products as possible and as much as anything a liking for the whole
philosophy that produced GNU and Open Source software and of course Linux.
--
PLEASE read the Red Hat FAQ, Tips, Errata and the MAILING LIST ARCHIVES!
http://www.redhat.com http://archive.redhat.com
To unsubscribe: mail redhat-list-request@redhat.com with
"unsubscribe" as the Subject.
