Question about securelevel

[Patrick Proniewski]

On 11 févr. 2004, at 14:30, Jim Zajkowski wrote:

>> Could this configuration be considered secure, according to you?
>
> There's no way to determine that without some consideration of the 
> threats you are facing.  Security considerations against simple 
> attacks (e.g., kiddies) are a lot different than considerations 
> against industrial espionage, against discovery by the secret police, 
> and against very smart government spies.
>
> What are you protecting?  From whom?  At what cost?


the cost is, to me, the more relevant point because every aspects of a 
security policy has a cost or can be seen as a cost.
Security is :
	time that you spend to setup = cost
	time that you spend for maintenance = cost
	increased complexity on the workflow (user teaching, admin training, 
more delay) = cost
	less time for disaster recovery = negative cost
	protecting valuable data/info = negative cost

When you sum all this, you should get a negative total cost, if not 
then your security policy is probably overkill.

I guess if I would want a perfect secure system I would start with a 
bootable CD as main filesystem, with, why not, union filesystems at 
some mount point for more flexibility.


patpro
-- 
je cherche un poste d'admin-sys Mac/UNIX
(ou une jeune et jolie femme riche)
http://patpro.net/cv.php