Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2002 10:18:32 -0800 (PST) From: Mark Crispin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Wed, 27 Nov 2002 13:14:54 -0500, Lawrence Greenfield wrote: > Note: a server implementation MUST implement a > configuration Although that weasel-wording helps previous source distributions (if you remember, I lobbied hard for it), it does not help binary distributions if the binary is not also configurable. I'd call such a unconfigurable binary distribution extremely user-unfriendly. I don't know about you, but I'd be uncomfortable with a binary which can be easily re-configured to be less secure... If an attacker is in the position to reconfigure the security parameters, the game is long over. Larry
