[67550] in Cypherpunks
RE: WINDOWS NT ????
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Adamsc)
Mon Oct 7 17:24:25 1996
From: Adamsc@io-online.com (Adamsc)
To: "adamsc@io-online.com" <adamsc@io-online.com>,
"matthew@itconsult.co.uk" <matthew@itconsult.co.uk>
Cc: "cypherpunks@toad.com" <cypherpunks@toad.com>,
"mera2@itconsult.co.uk" <mera2@itconsult.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 06 Oct 96 20:35:00 -0700
Reply-To: "Chris Adams" <adamsc@io-online.com>
On Sun, 6 Oct 1996 11:39:53 +0100, Matthew Richardson wrote:
>> Okay, correct me if I'm wrong on this (as if you wouldn't...):
>> 1. Microsoft markets NT with C2 security
>> 2. Numerous industry magazines report that you can bypass NTFS file
>> security by booting off of a diskette and using NTFSDOS.
>> 3. Numerous industry magazines (and I believe MS finally mentioned it
>> in some routine status update) all say that NT should now be considered
>> C2 *ONLY* on machines w/o floppy drives.
>
>Microsoft only claim C2 security when the machine is physically secured
>and not attached to any network. Specifically NTFS makes no claim of any
>encryption and can thus be read by non-NT software.
Now. They used to claim C2 for a machine w/floppies. Now they don't.
# Chris Adams <adamsc@io-online.com> | http://www.io-online.com/adamsc/adamsc.htp
# <cadams@acucobol.com> | send mail with subject "send PGPKEY"
"That's our advantage at Microsoft; we set the standards and we can change them."
--- Karen Hargrove, Microsoft (quoted in the Feb 1993 Unix Review editorial)
