Great Circle Associates Firewalls
(January 1994)
 

Indexed By Date: [Previous] [Next] Indexed By Thread: [Previous] [Next]

Subject: yow!!
From: hobbit @ ftp . com (*Hobbit*)
Date: Thu, 06 Jan 1994 13:36:33 EST
To: firewalls @ greatcircle . com

Well, ya live and learn.  I didn't intend to ignite quite that much tinder,
but I *did* solicit opinions about something that's probably a political
football of a different shape and size at every individual site.  I have
collected many opinions now, and get the idea.  Thanx all... y' can stop..

The overwhelming response, of course, was "they were wrong to probe NFS",
but this group is probably heavily biased in that direction -- that's why
we're all on this list, eh?  Those who don't care don't have any interest
in firewalling.  Like the FSF.

The FSF *has* occasionally been forced to clamp down just a teeny bit in
cases of heavy cracking.  It does happen.  What really surprises me is
that it doesn't happen more often, and in really subtle and nasty ways
[like dropping backdoors into the socket code in an emacs release, and
overwriting all those world-writeable tar or gz files with the changed stuff]. 
That kind of thing, if done right, would probably go undetected for *months*.

But it hasn't happened.  Maybe FSF is doing something right after all...

_H*



Indexed By Date Previous: Re: Opinion Requested
From: owen @ netcom . com (Owen DeLong)
Next: gopher and http through firewalls [was "Re: Opinion requested"]
From: George Hartzell <hartzell @ postgres . Berkeley . EDU>
Indexed By Thread Previous: RE: Opinion
From: Chuck Mulleady <mull4799 @ notes_gw . npfc . gov>
Next: Re: yow!!
From: Paul . Danielson @ West . Sun . COM (Paul Danielson)

Google
 
Search Internet Search www.greatcircle.com