Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 23 Apr 1999 00:24:16 -0400 (EDT) | From | "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <> | Subject | Re: inheritable set [was Re: caps in elf headers: use the sticky |
| |
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1999 10:55:05 -0700 From: Casey Schaufler <casey@sgi.com>
> The various company's Trusted Unix systems were mostly compatible, > but unfortunately, not quite; that's why there was a push to try to > standardize caoabukutues within POSIX in the first place.
This is a reasonable assumption, but turns out not to have been the case. The Posix P1003.1e/2c effort began in 1986 as a /usr/group draft, presented by AT&T's Unix Systems Lab. At the time only Gould (anyone remeember them?) had actually fielded anything. We were all under the specter of the "C2 in '92" directive, and were pretty clueless. The effort moved to POSIX about a year later because two someones (names withheld until someone buys me that beer...) felt that AT&T was trying to railroad their plans into a standard. They were, by the way. So, the POSIX security group (P1003.6 at the time) became a giant design committee, representing every vendor of note and many important customers. The POSIX draft does not reflect the vendor's implementations, the implementations reflect the draft. The only exceptions I know of are SVR4ES, which stuck with what they'd entered the fray with, and HP, which holds tightly to their SecureWare heritage in some ways.
Ah, thanks for describing the history. I had wondered why Trusted HPUX was different from the draft and from the rest of the other Trusted Unices.
Will you be at Linux Expo? I wouldn't mind buying you that beer....
- Ted
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |