> On Jan 31, 2015, at 8:04 AM, James B. Byrne <byrn...@harte-lyne.ca> wrote:
> 
> 1. The password strength decision is driven by RH corporate.

So who do you believe is driving RH corporate?  Why are they expending the 
effort to do this?

The answer is clear to me: general security principles.  By the time EL8 comes 
out, we’ll have had ~3 years of warnings under EL7 that weak passwords would 
not be tolerated, and they’re finally disallowing them.  Good!

(More like 6 years, actually, because EL6 gives a red warning bar for weak 
passwords.)

Let’s flip it around: what’s your justification *for* weak passwords?

We use them here temporarily during setup, but we lock the system down with a 
secure unique password before deployment.  Switching to something more secure 
really is not that burdensome.

> 2. There is not going to be any back-off by the developers.

Why would there be?  The trend in security is clear: keep up or get run over.

The only question is how quickly forward we proceed, not which direction 
“forward” is.

RHEL has been moving forward pretty darn slowly.  The current system in EL7 
allows *appallingly* bad passwords.  Passwords that can be cracked in 
reasonable time scales even with SSH’s existing rate-limiting.

> 4. There is absolutely no rational argument that can be made to anyone
> alter any of this.

That could be because there is no rational reason.

Got one?  Lay it on me.  Please include a description of the threat model where 
a password like byrnej123 should be allowed, which *is* allowed in EL7, as long 
as root is setting it and says “Yes, I really am sure I want such a dreadfully 
easy to crack password.”

> 5. Protesting there is evidently meaningless as well.

While I’ve got the floor, I would like to encourage everyone to send mail to 
g...@universe.org to protest tomorrow’s sunrise.

Rationale: Melanoma is bad.

> This change was not discussed

Hmm, yes, let’s hold public committee hearings for every technical change.  The 
resulting bureaucratic mire will surely usher in the Year of Linux!

> ( Odd, is it not, that Mr. Williamson professes that there is no
> secret motive but cannot actually provide one when asked. )

What secret motive *could* there be??  The current security policy is weak, and 
this change fixes that.  End of story.
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Reply via email to