*BSD News Article 62190


Return to BSD News archive

Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!olive.mil.adfa.oz.au!navmat.navy.gov.au!posgate.acis.com.au!warrane.connect.com.au!news.syd.connect.com.au!news.mel.connect.com.au!munnari.OZ.AU!news.ecn.uoknor.edu!news.cis.okstate.edu!news.ksu.ksu.edu!news.mid.net!news.dra.com!news.id.net!news.cic.net!chi-news.cic.net!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!agate!boulder!wilcoxb
From: wilcoxb@cs.colorado.edu (Bryce)
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.development.system,comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.networking,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc,comp.unix.bsd.netbsd.misc,comp.unix.bsd.bsdi.misc
Subject: Re: need secure OS to entrust millions to
Followup-To: comp.os.linux.development.system
Date: 24 Feb 1996 16:58:49 GMT
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Lines: 74
Message-ID: <4gng49$b2i@lace.colorado.edu>
References: <4gi6t6$3h9@lace.colorado.edu> <4gl7os$9av@skate.demon.co.uk>
Reply-To: bryce@c2.org
NNTP-Posting-Host: nag.cs.colorado.edu
Bcc: bryce@c2.org
Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.os.linux.development.system:18054 comp.os.linux.misc:88503 comp.os.linux.networking:29737 comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc:14380 comp.unix.bsd.netbsd.misc:2321 comp.unix.bsd.bsdi.misc:2463

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

 I, Bryce <wilcoxb@cs.colorado.edu>, wrote:
>
> I'm writing documentation which advises banks on how to
> setup an electronic banking software package on a
> Net-connected, firewall-protected Intel box.  Some of the
> most important banks in the world will be reading this
> documentation very soon.


 Iain Hibbert <plunky@skate.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
> However, I can only suggest that you remove specific system
> recommendations from the document and instead recommend that
> they use an experienced Unix/Security admin person to choose,
> install and _continually_administer_ the system if they want
> to run a secure site.  Such a person would know the options
> and would install something that they would be able to keep
> control of.


I think Iain has the best answer yet!  Thanks to everyone
who followed-up and e-mailed me with many pertinent points
to make.  After a little deliberation it became very clear
that the proper thing to do was to remove all security
recommendations which were not specifically within the
domain of our application.  Security issues are too complex,
and too important, to address with a mere line or two in a
document which has a different purpose.  Thankfully the 
question of a secure OS (as well as the questions of 
firewalling, networking, physical security, key 
distribution, access by insiders, etc etc etc) falls outisde
of our domain.


It was really interesting to read the specific issues (e.g. 
one guy said that "the linux TCP/IP stack has some serious 
flaws in it's buffer handling, and if your traffic is high, 
you may wish to consider that.  Also the firewall code is 
buggy, and the support for well-hidden MD5 encrypted 
passwords is not there.  s/key and kerberos do not integrate
well with linux.".), and the larger issue of
source-available OS'es versus commercially-supported OS'es.
Although I'm a big fan of the free OS phenomenon, I would
almost certainly have to go with an OS that was designed
specifically for security, e.g. TIS, QNX, etc.  Possibly the
best of both worlds would be to convince some company or
some collection of hackers (hint hint) to take a free-source
OS and hack it into a highly secure form.


Okay I sent this to all newsgroups because I started this
thread and wanted to broadcast its resolution.  Follow-ups
oughta be directed to one specific group or another...



Regards,

Bryce



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
Comment: Auto-signed under Unix with 'BAP' Easy-PGP v1.1b1

iQCVAwUBMS9DovWZSllhfG25AQHW6QP/UoI00hwDsDyxyqkT4CSFbB1VUzyKODfR
d0/LFGWdXQg3FNAwHTuDbn7ivMzfW3VWioLDgFBQeo22vLRzcyES/68tIvIM5Ehi
W6ITnPo2XPJxZ2L2uhV/EAR4SNcPg6ONka9A/CbTWpxKGeT2jTYgl47YGwpsWggJ
cOFpjyB8fos=
=gmE2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----