Re^2: 386/486, well configured: HOW MANY USERS?

[James Buster]

In article <8d.I02cO8a0k01 at amdahl.uts.amdahl.com> dacseg at uts.amdahl.com (Scott E. Garfinkle) writes:
>>    SCO is _much_ easier to configure and administer.
>>    The C2 Trusted Computer features are for neurotics, paranoids,
>> left-brains, or worse yet government control freaks.  Not recommended
>> for sane human beings.
>I agree with the latter statement, though it somewhat contradicts the former
>statement -- there is *no* way to remove completely the secureware (C2/B1)
>stuff from SCO Unix.  Also, having installed/administerd both SCO Unix and
>ESIX, I wouldn't necessarily say that SCO is a *lot* better.

Since SCO doesn't have Mandatory Access Control, it can hardly even
entertain the notion of B1 security. As for C2, it is relatively simple
to add C2 features to Unix. That SCO may have botched the job doesn't
damn C2 in general. I will say that, IMHO, most people who think
they need C2 or B1 features really don't, and that they are deluding
themselves about the effort necessary to maintain a really secure system.
--
---------------------------------------------------------------------
        James Buster		(Domain) bitbug at lonewolf.ebay.sun.com
  Mad Hacker Extraordinaire	(UUCP)   ...!sun.com!lonewolf!bitbug
---------------------------------------------------------------------