In <200005081557.e48Fv6803605@pincoya.inf.utfsm.cl> Horst von Brand (vonbrand@inf.utfsm.cl) wrote:
HB> Khimenko Victor <khim@dell.sch57.msk.ru> said:
HB> [...]
>> It works beautifully. As long as intruder does not know where exactly
>> traps are placed he can not avoid traps. Will it work as long time defence
>> against scilled cracker SPECIALLY directed against you ? Probably not.
>> Will it stop most crackers ? For sure. As long as traps are NOT common and
>> thus not known to majority of crackers!
HB> It will work beautifully for people like you, who don't need it (they know
HB> how to secure a box, I presume). It won't work for unwashed users of
HB> "Distribution Foo", all of whom get the same traps. And they are the ones
HB> who would really need it. Pure bloat, no benefit.
Gah. The whole subthread started when I basically said "Such thing works fine
in short terms but only as long as it's not in standard kernel". Looks like
not everyone can understood such a long sentence :-( Yeah, OF COURSE "security
via obscurity" WILL NOT work if it's in standard (mainstream or just standard
for some distribution) kernel - you basically have no obscurity there in first
place...
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon May 15 2000 - 21:00:11 EST