1998-06-03 - Re: WinNT C2? - How about WinNT and some C-4?

Header Data

From: Jim Tatz <jtatz@chemistry.ohio-state.edu>
To: Andrew White <awhite@indigo.ie>
Message Hash: 3db77c6fd8cc16a9846f1e9fd4fa46853d5b7e97d87c081691c247d7dd624aee
Message ID: <Pine.GSO.3.93.980603020142.5235B-100000@chemistry.mps.ohio-state.edu>
Reply To: <008e01bd8ead$5cdc4db0$0100007f@localhost>
UTC Datetime: 1998-06-03 06:05:48 UTC
Raw Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 23:05:48 -0700 (PDT)

Raw message

From: Jim Tatz <jtatz@chemistry.ohio-state.edu>
Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 23:05:48 -0700 (PDT)
To: Andrew White <awhite@indigo.ie>
Subject: Re: WinNT C2? - How about WinNT and some C-4?
In-Reply-To: <008e01bd8ead$5cdc4db0$0100007f@localhost>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.3.93.980603020142.5235B-100000@chemistry.mps.ohio-state.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


> NT 4.0 has never passed ANY security evaluation. NT 3.51 passed a UK one in
> October 1996, NT 3.5 passed C2 in
> 1995. Both these earlier versions are effectively unusable due to diverse
> and numerous bugs unrelated to security,
> and both the evaulations were without a network card.

Surprisingly enough NT4.0 has not received the C2 rating, although I could
have sworn I have seen remarks about Nt4.0 and C2 certification on a
Microsoft page. According to WIRED, NT 4.0 is undergoing testing, and will
supposedly be certified in Oct.

Apparently the gov't isn't too happy with the way MS is bluring the edges
of C2 certification of their products [Which they are buying].

	http://www.wired.com/news/news/technology/story/12121.html

-Jim






Thread