From: louis@BARRA.COM (Louis Dunne)
Newsgroups: comp.os.vms
Subject: Re: BACKUP Question...
Date: 10 Nov 92 21:43:33 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: BARRA Inc., Berkeley, California.

On Nov 7,  7:21am, Carl J Lydick wrote:
> Subject: Re: BACKUP Question
>In article <9211062238.AA11641@hermann.barra.COM>, louis@BARRA.COM (Louis Dunne) writes:
>>	Many people re-use old backup tapes, e.g.  every two weeks or so
>>	the incremental tapes "come back around" to the set you used two
>>	weeks ago. Now this tape has data from two weeks ago on it. Of
>>	course your sysop loads it into the drive, and goes home for the evening.
>>	Then someone else *ANYONE* (unless you do something to stop them - see
>>	below) mounts that tape device and starts reading data off the tape.
>
>Fine.  Fire that sysop.  You should NEVER load media until the drive's been
>allocated, if you care about access to the data on that media.  If the nightly
>BACKUP's not supposed to run until the wee hours of the morning, have the batch
>job allocate the tape then WAIT until it's time to start the BACKUP.
>
	This is ONE way of doing things, it is not the only way, and may not be
	what the system manager wants. My suggestion prevent everyone, except
	those authorized, from using that tape drive (see comments about
	physical security below). Some people want that.

	I'm not saying that either solution is better than the other, people
	use whatever is more convenient for them.

	As I said in my original post, using device ACLs is MY SUGGESTION, I'm
	sure there are other ways to accomplish the same thing (or similar).

>[More nonsense based on the mistaken impression that without physical security
>ACLs and device protections can prevent a user from reading your tapes deleted]

	Firstly, IMO my original posting showed one part of implementing
	secure BACKUPS (it is not nonsense). It is not a "mistaken impression",
	I did NOT say that it was the only way to do things. I know one person
	who doesn't like using the method you have suggested, and decided to use
	ACLs on his tape device instead.

	Be more judicious in your use of "nonsense".

>
>If you permit users physical access to your computer, then (with the exception
>of some of the newer VAXen which, if I remember correctly, have a console
>password), they CAN subvert any sort of software security you've got in place.
>For that matter, if they can get to the tapes, what's to stop them from
>carrying them to another machine to read them?

	This is something that I would consider VERY obvious. If you allow
	physical access to your machines to anyone, or leave tapes lying
	around where people can pick them up, then it's pretty obvious that you
	don't have a secure shop. If there are administrators out there who
	don't understand this, then there really in trouble.

	Lastly, look in the FAQ at some tips on how to answer questions without
	bashing people!

Louis
       -------------------------------------------------------------------------
      / Louis Dunne                          /                                /
     /  VMS/UNIX Systems                    /  Internet:   louis@barra.com   /
    /                                      /   Phone:      +1 510 649-4229  / 
   /    BARRA, Inc.                       /    Fax:        +1 510 548-4374 /
  /     1995 University Ave., Suite 400  /                                /
 /      Berkeley, CA 94704              /                                /
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Newsgroups: comp.os.vms