On Sun, 23 Dec 2007, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> I'm just surprised that people are actually surprised by this. To me,
> it's just a natural fact that happens to pretty much all systems. And a
> good reason not to let arbitrary users run processes that can bind to
> something on your server.
Not everybody works for Enterprise, where price does not matter. I
cannot afford a dedicated servers for database, DNS, e-mail,
antispam, firewall, file, WWW etc. Even administrative overhead would
be too much for one person IT staff. I have to run all of this
and much more on one machine, so I'm interested in limiting rights
for a user for example running WWW, so when, god forbid, compromized,
it'd limit damage.
I am also not able to run sophisticated security frameworks, limiting
every user rights to just what they need, as maintaining it would
require a security full-timer.
So I'm not very fond of this "insecure by default, it's your problem
to make it secure" attitude. I'm the one who reported this.
Regards
Tometzky
--
...although Eating Honey was a very good thing to do, there was a
moment just before you began to eat it which was better than when you
were... Winnie the Pooh