On Mon, 07 Feb 2005 13:10:42 -0800, Stephen Samuel (leave the email alone) <samnospam@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > http://ask.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=138603&cid=11599438 > > A comment in Slashdot reminding me of why ethereal is no longer > ported to OpenBSD, and the fact that I just upgraded my oBSD > firewall (lamenting this exclusion), has prompted me to write > this. > > Perhaps it's time to build some firewalls into ethereal. This > would actually consist of two different parts: > > One is priveledge seperation. > The other is dissector categorization. > I don't use OpenBSD, but file permissions on the bpf device *should* allow Ethereal to capture packets as a non-root user on OpenBSD. > Categorizing disssectors based on their security would have > two purposes: > 1) I propose that, by default, only the most 'secure' of > dissectors be enabled by default. Users who want the > less secure dissectors (because they need them and/or > they'r not in an overtly 'hostile' environment. could > enable the rest explicitly. I can only think of two categories for Ethereal code... code with a known security bug, and code with unknown security bugs. The Ethereal community is very rapid in responding to security bugs; I don't know of any instance where we left known security problems to linger. So, I don't see how we could categorize dissectors into security levels. Either they are or they aren't, and if they aren't, we fix them right away. --gilbert
Powered by MHonArc 2.6.10