On Thu, 23 Nov 2006 08:25:20 -0500
Bill Moran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > So, does it mean that Windows 2003 Server provides more Password Level
> > Security with Unauthorized Access?
>
> Where is this presumption coming from? Windows OS suffer from the same
> difficulty protecting from physical intrusion that any other OS does.
Precisely - MS makes a very strong (and valid) point of saying that once 'the
bad guys' have physical access to your box, the machine is owned.
The was a (very cool) presentation in Ruxcon (ruxcon.org) this year about
hacking into someone's machine via Firewire. And even if it was an exploit,
neither the researcher/hacker nor MS would consider it "security issue", because
to use this FW attack you need physical access... ie, you've lost the battle
already, it's just a matter of picking your method of breaking in.
In short, secure the box both physically and network / services-wise as much as
possible.
Best,
_________________________
{Beto|Norberto|Numard} Meijome
UFOs are for real: the Air Force doesn't exist.
I speak for myself, not my employer. Contents may be hot. Slippery when wet.
Reading disclaimers makes you go blind. Writing them is worse. You have been
Warned.
_______________________________________________
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
