[ previous ] [ next ] [ threads ]
 From:  Paul Taylor <PaulTaylor at winn dash dixie dot com>
 To:  "Pavel A. Grodek" <m0n0wall at abletools dot com>, m0n0wall dash dev at lists dot m0n0 dot ch
 Subject:  RE: [m0n0wall-dev] Re: MFS
 Date:  Mon, 31 Oct 2005 08:07:38 -0500
Answers below:

-----Original Message-----
From: Pavel A. Grodek [mailto:m0n0wall at abletools dot com] 
Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2005 5:42 AM
To: m0n0wall dash dev at lists dot m0n0 dot ch
Subject: Re: [m0n0wall-dev] Re: MFS

PG> I don't really think this is a really important consideration.
PG> Basically, if you've been hacked once, it would be trivial to hack you
PG> again after you reboot back to your original image.

I totally agree that without some change to the Monowall it would be
possible again, but this does ensure that you don't have any backdoors
written to your Monowall by a hacker (after a reboot).

PG> Such things as ability to boot from some ancient CD-ROM drive and have
PG> less hardware to break in this computer and easily survive random
PG> reboots are much more important.

Yes - those are good reasons too...  I'm just security minded...  I was hit
with the witty worm back a year or so ago and I've seen a lot of malware
that's very difficult to remove loaded on friend's PCs, so I suppose that's
my focus.

PG> I have to agree - with a pre-made development VM a lot of development
PG> tasks would be accessible to people who don't want or just don't have
PG> time to do everything from scratch, but are willing to help.

Nothing to add here really...