Hello,

29.07.2008 17:05, Tilman Schmidt wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Jul 2008 13:11:53 +0200, Arno Lehmann wrote:
>> I still see the advice to disable SELinux if third party applications 
>> don't work on RH quite often...
> 
> Yeah, because its the easy way out. Just like working with
> Administrator privileges all the time on Windows. (SCNR)
Windows XP - Vista is much better there.

Nice comparison... fortunately, this is the other way round, i.e. 
the're running so safe a system it isn't usable for certain purposes, 
instead of running an absolutely insecure thing...

>> In fact I always wonder why people install and use SELinux if they're 
>> not capable of managing it, but that's another story...
> 
> My impression is that most of them do it unknowingly because it's
> enabled by default in their distribution. And I think that's ok.
> A machine secured without its owner's knowledge is still better
> than a machine not secured because its owner doesn't know how.

For a stand-alone client, I absolutely agree. But for servers or 
centrally managed desktops I expect the administrative staff to think 
about this sort of thing before deploying.

Arno

-- 
Arno Lehmann
IT-Service Lehmann
Sandstr. 6, 49080 Osnabrück
www.its-lehmann.de

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users