lists.openwall.net   lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  linux-cve-announce  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2006 14:40:02 +0200
From: Schanulleke <schalulleke@...il.com>
To: Chris Umphress <umphress@...il.com>
Cc: "Gerald \(Jerry\) Carter" <jerry@...ba.org>,
	full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk, bugtraq@...urityfocus.com,
	coderpunk <coderpunk@...il.com>
Subject: Re: Linux kernel source archive vulnerable

Chris Umphress wrote:
>> That assumes a proper umask. The kernel source should not depend on
>> the end user's umask being setup properly.
>
> Is it the kernel developers' fault if your umask is extremely lax for
> a normal user? If it is lax, security of the kernel source isn't your
> only problem.... Security in general is.
>

So what you say is.
If there is a fault in a system that you could mitigate by certain 
behaviour, then it is your own responcibility to take that behaviour and 
the fault should not be fix.

So if a car is designed with a steering wheel that punctures your chest 
if you get in a crash and you are not wearing a seatbelt, that is not a 
disgn flaw because you should wear a seatbelt?

Ever heard of defense in depth????

Schanulleke

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ