Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > alt.folklore.computers > #148321
| From | "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | alt.folklore.computers |
| Subject | Re: The joy of simplicity? |
| Date | 2015-07-17 05:49 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <d0qg66Fqs5uU1@mid.individual.net> (permalink) |
| References | <PM00051AE92462C0E0@aca40f69.ipt.aol.com> <PM00051AE92462C0E0@aca40f69.ipt.aol.com> <PM00051AE92462C0E0@aca40f69.ipt.aol.com> <1443018172458656142.548953peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org> <PM00051AFE21B80058@aca42e0b.ipt.aol.com> |
"jmfbahciv" <See.above@aol.com> wrote in message
news:PM00051AFE21B80058@aca42e0b.ipt.aol.com...
> Peter Flass wrote:
>> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>>> Andrew Swallow wrote:
>>>> On 14/07/2015 13:02, jmfbahciv wrote:
>>>>> Rod Speed wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "jmfbahciv" <See.above@aol.com> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:PM00051AAD3E31090D@aca46c7b.ipt.aol.com...
>>>>>>> Andrew Swallow wrote:
>>>> {snip}
>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This will help but unfortunately the database you are keeping
>>>>>>>> secret
>>>>>>>> ends up inside the sandbox.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Implement a file daemon like we did on TOPS-10.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Doesn’t do a damned thing about the problem he is talking about.
>>>>>
>>>>> Of course it can. The file daemone can do anything one wants it to.
>>>>> In order to circumvent the security, a cracker has to patch the
>>>>> monitor
>>>>> to redirect the IPCF messages _and_ its contents.
>>>>>
>>>>> /BAH
>>>>>
>>>> Can the virus tell the daemone to get the next database record?
>>>> If so repeat until the entire database has been extracted.
>>>>
>>> Only if the file daemon is designed to allow such access without
>>> security.
>>>
>>> Using a file daemon to access otherwise protected files from a user,
>>> including an app, allows access without the user/app having to have
>>> the system privileges one would need if a daemon wasn't available.
>>>
>>> The sample JMF wrote, was designed to extend access to files. There
>>> isn't
>>> anything preventing a daemon from accessing the contents of files.
>>> The neat thing was that you could protect a file from [1,2] accessing
>>> it. [1,2] was the equivalent user to Unix' sudo (I think that's what
>>> it's called.)
>>>
>>
>> A daemon has nothing to do with this. The file system has to run at a
>> higher privilege level (which most do) and have no bugs or security holes
>> (which doesn't seem to be true). The problem seems to be that
>> unauthorized
>> code takes advantage of holes in the system get an elevated privilege
>> level
>> and access things it shouldn't.
>
> If you have a file daemon, you can protect all files and directories from
> any access at all times.
There you go, utterly mangling the terminology just like you always do.
> when an access fails, the file daemon can be called to decide
> if access should be allowed.
But it needs to have some basis for making that decision.
> With that you can have MBs of code examining the situation and making
> decisions. What's more you could also create sectors of file daemons
> called by the master file daemon. A lot of protections on the PDP-10s
> were built into the way we handled [P,PN]s. ppn protections were
> stricter and easier than access ids which were names.
That last isn't the problem being discussed.
And iOS essentially does what you are talking about and
so utterly misnamed by sandboxing so nothing gets access
to the data that belongs to an app except the app itself and
with stuff like the contacts where more than one app needs
to have access to some of the data at times, the user gets
to authorise access by other than the app that owns the data.
Its never going to be possible for 'a file daemon' to decide
just what need to have access to stuff like the contacts.
Back to alt.folklore.computers | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: The joy of simplicity? Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2015-07-08 00:27 -0300
Re: The joy of simplicity? Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2015-07-08 09:32 -0700
Re: The joy of simplicity? "ratsack" <ratgsack281@nospam.com> - 2015-07-10 05:28 +1000
Re: The joy of simplicity? hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-07-08 09:54 -0700
Re: The joy of simplicity? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2015-07-08 17:43 +0000
Re: The joy of simplicity? Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2015-07-08 15:48 -0300
Re: The joy of simplicity? hda <agent700@ay.invalid> - 2015-07-08 22:03 +0200
Re: The joy of simplicity? Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2015-07-09 03:14 -0300
Re: The joy of simplicity? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-07-09 07:38 +0000
Re: The joy of simplicity? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-07-09 17:40 +0000
Re: The joy of simplicity? Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2015-07-09 16:32 -0300
Re: The joy of simplicity? "ratsack" <ratgsack281@nospam.com> - 2015-07-10 05:35 +1000
Re: The joy of simplicity? Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2015-07-09 16:51 -0300
Re: The joy of simplicity? Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-07-10 00:50 +0100
Re: The joy of simplicity? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-07-10 00:27 +0000
Re: The joy of simplicity? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-07-10 16:36 +0000
Re: The joy of simplicity? Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-07-10 19:01 +0100
Re: The joy of simplicity? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-07-10 13:13 -0500
Re: The joy of simplicity? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-07-10 13:20 -0500
Re: The joy of simplicity? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-07-10 18:59 +0000
Re: The joy of simplicity? Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-07-10 21:08 +0100
Re: The joy of simplicity? Morten Reistad <first@last.navn> - 2015-07-11 00:42 +0200
Re: The joy of simplicity? Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-07-11 20:47 +0100
Re: The joy of simplicity? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-07-12 12:53 +0000
Re: The joy of simplicity? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-07-13 05:40 +1000
Re: The joy of simplicity? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-07-14 12:02 +0000
Re: The joy of simplicity? Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-07-14 13:32 +0100
Re: The joy of simplicity? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-07-15 12:19 +0000
Re: The joy of simplicity? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-07-15 12:31 +0000
Re: The joy of simplicity? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-07-17 05:49 +1000
Re: The joy of simplicity? Morten Reistad <first@last.navn> - 2015-07-17 18:43 +0200
Re: The joy of simplicity? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-07-19 09:01 +1000
Re: The joy of simplicity? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-07-19 13:25 +0000
Re: The joy of simplicity? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-07-20 06:20 +1000
Re: The joy of simplicity? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-07-20 13:29 +0000
Re: The joy of simplicity? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-07-20 15:26 +0000
Re: The joy of simplicity? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-07-21 12:53 +0000
Re: The joy of simplicity? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-07-21 05:52 +1000
Re: The joy of simplicity? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-07-19 09:49 +1000
Re: The joy of simplicity? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-07-19 13:25 +0000
Re: The joy of simplicity? Morten Reistad <first@last.navn> - 2015-07-19 18:15 +0200
Re: The joy of simplicity? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-07-20 13:29 +0000
Re: The joy of simplicity? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-07-21 05:49 +1000
Re: The joy of simplicity? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-07-20 06:38 +1000
Re: The joy of simplicity? jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-07-20 13:29 +0000
Re: The joy of simplicity? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-07-21 05:55 +1000
Re: The joy of simplicity? "Hank" <hfd543@nospam.com> - 2015-07-12 06:00 +1000
Re: The joy of simplicity? Morten Reistad <first@last.navn> - 2015-07-11 00:38 +0200
Re: The joy of simplicity? "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-07-10 15:27 -0500
Re: The joy of simplicity? Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2015-07-11 00:18 -0500
Re: The joy of simplicity? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-07-11 19:22 +1000
Re: The joy of simplicity? Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2015-07-10 17:53 -0700
Re: The joy of simplicity? "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-07-10 22:22 -0500
Re: The joy of simplicity? Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2015-07-10 23:39 -0700
Re: The joy of simplicity? simon@twoplaces.co.uk (Simon Turner) - 2015-07-10 08:27 +0100
Re: The joy of simplicity? Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-07-09 00:29 +0000
Re: The joy of simplicity? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-07-09 07:38 +0000
Re: The joy of simplicity? Daiyu Hurst <daiyu.hurst@gmail.com> - 2015-07-08 12:57 -0700
csiph-web