> It only runs on Solaris right now, but its an interesting
> approach adds a layer of security. I played with using it under
> named, but decided to go with chroot for portability to my other
> machines.
>
> http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~daw/janus/
>
> Adam
>
> Thomas H. Ptacek wrote:
> |>Another alternative that has the advantage of already existing and being
> |>relatively easy to use is the chroot() system call. For example, named would
> |>be a much less attractive target it if chroot()ed to /etc/namedb (or whatever)
> |>as soon as it knew where its startup directory was. Then all named could do is
> |>mangle your name service files.
> |
> | On almost all Unix operating systems, having superuser access in a
> | chroot() jail is still dangerous. In some recent revisions of 4.4BSD
> | operating systems, root can trivially escape chroot(), as well.
>
> --
> "It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once."
> -Hume
-- Eilon Gishri, Tel-Aviv University Computation Center Home 03-5078671 /* on a matter of national security */ E-mail: eilon@aristo.tau.ac.il