Hi.

if add exam security questions for understanding  role-based access control
(RBAC)   mandatory access control (MAC) and discretionary access control
(DAC).

2008/10/2 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

> Send lpi-examdev mailing list submissions to
>        [email protected]
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>        http://list.lpi.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lpi-examdev
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>        [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>        [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of lpi-examdev digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>   1.  303 Security exam objectives (G. Matthew Rice)
>   2. Re:  303 Security exam objectives (Etienne Goyer)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: 01 Oct 2008 17:21:59 -0400
> From: "G. Matthew Rice" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: [lpi-examdev] 303 Security exam objectives
> To: [email protected]
> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> Hi everyone,
>
> I've (finally) put up the draft objectives for the LPIC-3 303 Security
> exam.
>
> It is at:
>
>    https://group.lpi.org/publicwiki/bin/view/Examdev/LPIC-303
>
> It isn't big on details yet (I'll be adding some of those tomorrow) and
> there
> are certain things that I didn't add because I would like some feedback
> from
> everyone here first.
>
> So, any comments on the utility of adding some of these to the exam.
>
>
> 1. host-base access control
>
> This means things like more tcp wrappers, pam and things like password
> cracking.  Do we need more than what is in lpic-2/3 exams already?
>
>
> 2. bootloader security
>
> There must be more to it that 'put a password on it' :)
>
>
> 3. encrypted filesystems
>
> I'm thinking that the time isn't right for this.  Someone at the office
> won't
> stop pestering me about them, though, so...
>
>
> 4. secure remote access
>
> Meaning, adding vnc, rdesktop, ??? to the exam.
>
>
> And is there anything else that you think is really missing?
>
> Regards,
> --
> g. matthew rice <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>      starnix care, toronto, ontario, ca
> phone: 647.722.5301 x242                                  gpg id: EF9AAD20
> http://www.starnix.com              professional linux services & products
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Wed, 01 Oct 2008 17:28:08 -0400
> From: Etienne Goyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: [lpi-examdev] 303 Security exam objectives
> To: "This is the lpi-examdev mailing list." <[email protected]>
> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Disclaimer: I do not claim to a SME on security.
>
>
> G. Matthew Rice wrote:
> > 1. host-base access control
> >
> > This means things like more tcp wrappers, pam and things like password
> > cracking.  Do we need more than what is in lpic-2/3 exams already?
>
> To get into even more details?  Sure.
>
>
> > 2. bootloader security
> >
> > There must be more to it that 'put a password on it' :)
>
> Well, no.  The bootloader have a fairly simply function (bootstrap the
> OS).  Password-protecting the bootloader is standard host hardening
> practice, but that is pretty much where it stop.
>
> I would assume a LPIC-3 to understand the implication of not doing so,
> such as privileged run level being passed as kernel argument, or having
> kernel-based MAC mechanism turned off, etc.  We may want to test on that
> instead of "passwording the bootloader".
>
>
> > 3. encrypted filesystems
> >
> > I'm thinking that the time isn't right for this.  Someone at the office
> won't
> > stop pestering me about them, though, so...
>
> I would think that LUKS have stabilized enough to be an exam topic.
> Just MHO, tough.
>
>
> > 4. secure remote access
> >
> > Meaning, adding vnc, rdesktop, ??? to the exam.
>
> No.  I really do not see the point.
>
> Cheers!
>
>
> --
> Etienne Goyer                                       0x3106BCC2
>
> "For Bruce Schneier, SHA-1 is merely a compression algorithm."
> http://geekz.co.uk/schneierfacts/fact/164
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: signature.asc
> Type: application/pgp-signature
> Size: 252 bytes
> Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
> Url :
> http://list.lpi.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/lpi-examdev/attachments/20081001/82d4e9c1/signature-0001.pgp
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> lpi-examdev mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://list.lpi.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lpi-examdev
>
> End of lpi-examdev Digest, Vol 20, Issue 1
> ******************************************
>
_______________________________________________
lpi-examdev mailing list
[email protected]
http://list.lpi.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lpi-examdev

Reply via email to