Unix security additions

[John F Haugh II]

In article <QRXAL18 at xds13.ferranti.com>, peter at ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) writes:
> In article <1991Apr12.101319.8523 at jarvis.csri.toronto.edu> thomson at hub.toronto.edu (Brian Thomson) writes:
> > In article <PONA272 at xds13.ferranti.com> peter at ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) writes:
> > >Sure: back up to tape, read tape on a non-secure system, edit it, write
> > >it out again, and restore.
> 
> > You don't get a secure installation by buying a secure machine and
> > putting it in a location where a user can tamper with its backup tapes.
> 
> We're not talking about random users here. We're talking about the regular
> backup operators.
 
You are assuming that the restore program will allow you to restore
files that were not placed on it using the restore on the system it
came from.

> > Of course secure systems require physical safeguards!
> 
> Of course, but who watches the people who work behind those safeguards?

At some point in time you have to trust the people that you have
given the authority to do these things.  It's like the argument
about the earth riding on the back of turtles.  It can't be
turtles all the way down.
-- 
John F. Haugh II        | Distribution to  | UUCP: ...!cs.utexas.edu!rpp386!jfh
Ma Bell: (512) 255-8251 | GEnie PROHIBITED :-) |  Domain: jfh at rpp386.cactus.org
"If liberals interpreted the 2nd Amendment the same way they interpret the
 rest of the Constitution, gun ownership would be mandatory."