Re: SSH revised

[Christian Helmuth]

Hmm,

On Tue, Mar 28, 2006 at 10:34:54AM +0200, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> > Is the bottom line of this a) you don't care about MAC or b) HURD does not
> > care about MAC? IMO Mandatory Access Control is something somebody who
> > operates a server really wants...
> 
> I care about user freedom.  My understanding of the term MAC does not
> have anything to do with use of specific protocols to log on to the
> machine remotely.  Maybe if you explain how you understand the term
> MAC here, and why you think that the suggested mechanism violates it,
> I can respond to that.

My use case was "limit SSH to protocol version 2, because I (the owner)
consider it as safe enough for my system". An operating system for the
future should provide me with powerful tools sufficient for my needs and
no vague doubts should hinder this. Say: If it's crap I'll don't "buy" it.

> And again:  That somebody wants something is not a sufficient reason
> to do it (in fact, not even a necessary reason).

I understand this as: You don't care about anything somebody wants or
doesn't want including "user freedom", correct?

Personally, I do not like the new course this discussion takes, because it
becomes too political...
-- 
Christian Helmuth

TU Dresden, Dept. of CS
Operating Systems Group
http://os.inf.tu-dresden.de/~ch12