On Tue, Mar 20, 2007 at 08:57:36AM -0400, Peter Whittaker wrote: > > > UC3: Fritz is setting up a classroom or other contained > > > environment,
> > > UC4: Barbara is a security researcher setting up a honeypot. > > > > I fail to see why UC[34] would require unauthenticated access. > In Barbara's case, unauthenticated access is required because she > *wants* the box to be vulnerable, at least via this vector: She is > setting up a honeypot, she wants attackers to get in (at least part > way). Given she's a security researcher, she can probably hack the > code to do what she wants, so UC4 may be off the table. It's *so* off the table. We should not make provide any sort of UI for setting up a honey pot, just like we don't keep vulnerable versions of e.g. sendmail around. :-) I see don't particularly object to keeping the option around by way of gconf. The UI should just not allow it. -- | Soren Hansen | Linux2Go | http://Linux2Go.dk/ | | Seniorkonsulent | Lindholmsvej 42, 2. TH | +45 46 90 26 42 | | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 9400 Norresundby, Denmark | GPG key: E8BDA4E3 |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
-- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
