From: smorris AT xionics DOT com (Steve Morris)
Subject: Re: Windows98 + inetutils
30 Sep 1998 13:19:19 -0700
Message-ID: <13841.2852.122713.320606.cygnus.gnu-win32@frodo.xionics.com>
References: <199809281137 DOT IAA18732 AT swan2 DOT uspnet DOT usp DOT br>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: Hilton Fernandes <hgfernan AT usp DOT br>
Cc: Olle Olsson <olleo AT sics DOT se>, Stipe Tolj <tolj AT uni-duesseldorf DOT de>,
        gnu-win32 AT cygnus DOT com, Hilton Fernandes <hgfernan AT swan2 DOT uspnet DOT usp DOT br>


Hilton Fernandes writes:
 > 
 > It's possible that someone that uses MS-Windows 9X isn't particularly
 > afraid of security problems; otherwise, he or she would prefer NT or
 > some other OS.  Indeed, any user of a Windows 9X OS is already a
 > priviledged user that can do anything to the system.
 > 
 > So, maybe there isn't any additional problem with a non secure access
 > to Windows 9X.

At the risk of responding to a troll I have to say that even win 9x people
care about security when you add remote login. I'm willing to use physical
access to control security on any box I have hidden in my bedroom and off the
net. Even my non net unix boxes have no root password. 

I need better security when my box is on the net whether it is UNIX, NT or Win
95.

-
For help on using this list (especially unsubscribing), send a message to
"gnu-win32-request AT cygnus DOT com" with one line of text: "help".