[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: auditing

To: sommerfeld@apollo.hp.com (Bill Sommerfeld)
Subject: Re: auditing
From: Dan.McDonald@Eng.sun.com (Dan McDonald)
Date: Wed, 2 Apr 1997 16:24:43 -0800 (PST)
Cc: adams@cisco.com, Dan.McDonald@Eng.sun.com, ipsec@tis.com
In-Reply-To: <199704030021.TAA00664@thunk.ch.apollo.hp.com> from "Bill Sommerfeld" at Apr 2, 97 07:21:27 pm
Sender: owner-ipsec@ex.tis.com

> > Some platforms don't have the notion of privileged
> > applications. ie. Windows 95.

Or MacOS for that matter.  But Bill has beaten me to the punch when he
says...

> Actually, it was my impression that Win95 doesn't have a notion of
> *un*priviledged applications.  This is a subtle, but important,
> distinction..

Yep.  Win95/MacOS have all procs on the same playing field, for the most
part, therefore you can't deny BYPASS to any app for that particular
platform.

Dan

References:

Re: auditing

From: Bill Sommerfeld <sommerfeld@apollo.hp.com>

Prev by Date: Re: auditing
Next by Date: RE: MUST vs. SHOULD audit
Prev by thread: Re: auditing
Next by thread: RE: auditing
Index(es):
- Main
- Thread