Bastille

[markd at macports.org]

"paul beard" <paulbeard at gmail.com> writes:
>Well, the underlying issue is what would the Bastille port add to the
>ports collection? OS X is considered pretty secure out of the box and the
>ports collection offers a lot of tools to enhance and extend that. What
>does Bastille add?  
>
>
>I was surprised to learn of the reasons why this was requested, and it
>might make sense to open this issue to a larger audience: Bill's call,
>not mine. 

I looked at Bastille some time ago and it seems to me a MacPort might be
problematic because it makes configuration changes.  Ports that modify
core OS settings would violate the MacPorts principles of design.  There
is also auditing and reporting, which would be safe I presume, but I think
Bastille might not be a port that could live safely within MacPorts.

http://www.bastille-unix.org/undoing_bastille.htm

Mark