This is Diskless-NeXTs?? in view mode; [Up]
Date: Sun 08-Aug-1989 19:21:01 From: Unknown Subject: Diskless NeXT's?? We have a student laboratory filled with some NeXT's that will be connected to our departmental ethernet. We are planning on having three of the NeXT's run diskless and have a 660Mb in the fourth to provide disk services. It occurs to us that in this environment, a student could insert their own optical disk and defeat some of the controls we have instituted. Thus the question - is it possible to defeat the optical disk for purposes of system boot without completely disabling the optical? If this is not possible now, would NeXT consider such an option i nthe near future. Universities want to know. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I program ... therefore I am. John Lefor University of Rochester Dept of E. Engineering 716-275-8265 jal@ee.rochester.edu uunet!ur-valhalla!jal >From: bob@allosaur.cis.ohio-state.edu (Bob Sutterfield)
Date: Sun 08-Aug-1989 20:24:46 From: Unknown Subject: Re: Diskless NeXT's?? In article <1989Aug8.192101.3060@ee.rochester.edu> jal@ee.rochester.edu (John Lefor) writes: We have a student laboratory filled with some NeXT's That may have been your first mistake :-) Thus the question - is it possible to defeat the optical disk for purposes of system boot without completely disabling the optical? Apparently not. If this is not possible now, would NeXT consider such an option in the near future. Universities want to know. Depends upon what you mean by "near future." We've been asking this sort of optical/security question for over a year now, with no satisfactory answer. At this point, NeXT is so busy trying to achieve its own agenda in a measurable timeframe that it doesn't seem to have many resources left to spend making the cube useful to universities. >From: jgreely@oz.cis.ohio-state.edu (J Greely)
Date: Sun 08-Aug-1989 22:23:17 From: Unknown Subject: Re: Diskless NeXT's?? In article <1989Aug8.192101.3060@ee.rochester.edu> jal@ee.rochester.edu (John Lefor) writes: [networked NeXTs, running diskless] >It occurs to us that in this environment, a student could insert >their own optical disk and defeat some of the controls we have >instituted. Under 0.9, that is true. There's not much you can do to prevent these problems right now. >Thus the question - is it possible to defeat the optical disk for >purposes of system boot without completely disabling the optical? Not yet. Under 1.0, you will be able to prevent users from mucking about in the ROM monitor, which, in the absence of unforseen problems, should suffice to make ODs safe to use on networked machines. The changes were done a while ago, and I haven't heard of any problems with them. Of course, I haven't had a chance to beat on it myself, but that should come soon (my latest release quote, as of about an hour ago, is "early September"). "Fixed in 1.0" -=- J Greely (jgreely@cis.ohio-state.edu; osu-cis!jgreely) >From: UH2@PSUVM.BITNET (Lee Sailer)
Date: Sun 10-Aug-1989 14:05:50 From: Unknown Subject: Re: Diskless NeXT's?? In article <1989Aug8.192101.3060@ee.rochester.edu>, jal@ee.rochester.edu (John Lefor) says: > >Thus the question - is it possible to defeat the optical disk for >purposes of system boot without completely disabling the optical? >If this is not possible now, would NeXT consider such an option i nthe >near future. > I don't have a NeXT, so this is just an idea: To boot from the floptical, a user has to have the "system" on it, right? To build a lab of NeXTs (booting from a file server) but at the same time stop hordes of students from booting from their own flopties, a partial (very partial!) solution would be to not give students the "system". 1. The average student -- wouldn't take the time to figure out that he or she could copy the relevant system files from the server and construct a bootable disk. 2. The dedicated hacker -- could construct a bootable flopty, or simply obtain one elsewhere, but is by this time mature enough not to be malicious. 3. The malicious hacker -- will figure out a way to beat the system, anyway. In short, the thrust of this simple, though only parital solution is to throw a few organizational hurdles in front of the unauthorized system booter that will stop the ignorant meddler, plus throw a heavy dose of socialization at those who will eventually acquire the technical skills so that by the time they figure out how to be an unathorized booter they know better. Tangent--these same students could, at most schools, easily steal any and all faculty mail (paper--from faculty mail boxes). They don't. Because, at least in part, of socialization. We need the same community rules with regard to tampering with computer systems. lee >From: johnl@esegue.uucp (John Levine)
Date: Sun 11-Aug-1989 03:14:08 From: Unknown Subject: Re: Diskless NeXT's?? In article <1989Aug8.192101.3060@ee.rochester.edu>, jal@ee.rochester.edu (John Lefor) says: >Thus the question - is it possible to defeat the optical disk for >purposes of system boot without completely disabling the optical? You can set up a NeXT to boot from the optical, from the SCSI, or from the Ethernet. It's a parameter you set by typing at the ROM monitor. You can if you want boot from the net even if you have an optical and a SCSI disk.
Date: Sun 14-Aug-1989 16:31:00 From: Unknown Subject: Re: Diskless NeXT's?? I think perhaps the NeXT machine needs a keyswitch that simultaneously locks the case shut and forces it to boot from the hard disk (or network). In this way, you could prevent students from hacking on the network using a public NeXT box. On the other hand, I believe computer nets should be robust enough to prevent students from doing dangerous hacking. I once wrote TCP software for a PC connected to the ARPAnet, and there was no problem. However, one day my officemate crashed 3 vaxes using the PC's tftp. Berkeley UNIX was just too flakey and non-robust (the TCP couldn't handle zero-length packet options). It seems like only MIT and Xerox care enough to put an authentication protocol on their sensitive network services. Maybe other sites should start to care. Don Gillies, Dept. of Computer Science, University of Illinois 1304 W. Springfield, Urbana, Ill 61801 >From: jpd00964@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu
Date: Sun 16-Aug-1989 23:50:32 From: Unknown Subject: Re: Diskless NeXT's?? In article <JGREELY.89Aug11214350@oz.cis.ohio-state.edu> J Greely <jgreely@cis.ohio-state.edu> writes: >In article <245300019@uxe.cso.uiuc.edu> mcdonald@uxe.cso.uiuc.edu writes: >>I don't understand this. I get my NeXt in a box. I take it out and >>plug it in. I install the operating system, making myself root. What >>do you want to prohibit me from doing? > >Nothing. The current discussion has absolutely nothing to do with >personal machines. We're talking about university lab environments. >I don't much care what you do with your NeXT, but when you use *mine* >(translation: department facility), you will not be permitted to boot >the machine from your own disk. Period. If you have a carefully >customized environment on your OD, that's too bad. $10 says you're >not using my sendmail.cf, uid assignment scheme, subnet mask, YP >domain, NFS mounts, network routing, /bin/mail, /etc/rc, etc. > >-=- I guess I don't understand all the furor here. J. Greely is right on the mark when he says your machine is your own. On "our" network, as long as that little black wire is attached, you belong to us and are bound by our rules. But I think we can make things as "secure" as they're going to be with the following: The cubes boot diskless of a server (I think that's a given here). The student buys a BLANK OD from the Campus Store for REAL cheap. Say $10 (not too bad for 256 MB, we want them to buy it, remember?) Now SUPPOSE the hacker supreme figures out all the stuff he needs to get from the server, and, BTW, I hide all the juicy stuff like rc, rc.boot, hostconfig, etc. Now suppose he figures out the REAL root password to enable him to use netinfo over its security. Now suppose he (I use "he" here because he/she is tougher to type, no implications necessarily infered or implied) suppose he can also get to the proper gateway IPs and nameserver hosts (yep, you guessed it, I hide the full host-table elsewhere, users see a REAL limited local listing, and the gateway IPs are no where to be seen). Well fellow administrators, if they can do this, then, really, is there anything you can do without living in the facility and installing cameras everywhere. The kiddies will have 256 MB of portable data! That should take the average CS student through four years PLUS some! If they want to offload Apps, fine. If they want to caoy 'em to /u/<person>, fine...1.0 should (it better!) have quotas supported, they'll learn the hard way. The other concept is to say, to heck with it. No NET! You only really need it for printing, and the kids can walk a disk over if they need to (I think I spent too many years running PC/MAC facilities!). Now what about faculty/student mail. Well, folkes, that's why we have departmental mailboxes. I know, sounds like a return to the old days. Look, all I'm saying (the VERBOSE BIT is ON!!!) is that Steve RAISED the lowest common denominator a ton with portable 256 MB media. Most have praised this (me too!) some have problems with it. Security will ALWAYS be a #@$% pain if the machine is sitting in front of the user. The ROMs will help a little, but as someone mentioned already, most University kids are fairly normal and well socialized. I have a facility with 32 NeXTen (like Vaxen?...just a thought) all networked to our Engineering Quad Ethernet and I sleep well! And this campus spawned Morris! Thanks for listening: Roger Jagoda FQOJ@CORNELLA FQOJ@CORNELLA.CIT.CORNELL.EDU RULES OF MEDICAL SCHOOL: Air goes in and out... Blood goes round and round... Oxygen is good! >From: fqoj@vax5.CIT.CORNELL.EDU
These are the contents of the former NiCE NeXT User Group NeXTSTEP/OpenStep software archive, currently hosted by Marcel Waldvogel and Netfuture.ch.