[techtalk] Re: techtalk digest, Vol 1 #449 - 9 msgs

[Telsa Gwynne]

On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 01:47:35AM +1000 or thereabouts, Mary Gardiner wrote:

> However, it did remind me that Linux is a system with a large enough 
> public user base to be subject to frequent attacks when on a hostile 
> network (eg the internet).
> 
> Securing Linux is an important part of running Linux on anything other than
> an isolated desktop.
> 
> It's also something that is not easily translatable from Windows 95/98
> experience, since these don't tend to run services (difficult piece of
> knowledge: on Linux, viruses are rare and remote exploits are what you 
> should worry about).

Other thing, which I think is at the root of this thread.

The "computer at home" model is based on the idea that it's your
computer. You might share it with family members. You might create
yourself different accounts for work and leisure. But it is a single
machine. One case. One monitor. One keyboard. One mouse. If it's
a geeky household, it might have a second monitor and keyboard
for someone else to be logged in at the same time. 

UNIX, as I first met it, was not based on the idea of "one box, keyboard,
monitor and mouse, all in front of you". It was multiple users on multiple
accounts from multiple terminals which were nowhere near the console.
The terminals were in the library, in the 24-terminal room, in the
CS labs, and you logged in from them. These terminals varied from 
exciting vt100s to, um, some enthralling pieces of junk which made 
the purpose of /etc/termcap entirely clear. (Try to run almost anything
which involves redrawing the screen on a dumb terminal. Woo.)

All these terminals. And 'w' showed you people you'd never met and
your friends, and they were on tty this and that. But the root user
(or the operator account, or whatever) was sometimes logged in from
the console. And the console was special. 

(I never really knew _why_ it was special. It Just Was. :))

Telsa