Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2001 04:39:49 -0700 From: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> To: unknown source <callihn@hotmail.com> Cc: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Would it be so hard? Message-ID: <20010729043948.A87542@xor.obsecurity.org> In-Reply-To: <F119Joma8QyOPzPQXWk000090fe@hotmail.com>; from callihn@hotmail.com on Sun, Jul 29, 2001 at 10:36:24AM %2B0000 References: <F119Joma8QyOPzPQXWk000090fe@hotmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[-- Attachment #1 --] On Sun, Jul 29, 2001 at 10:36:24AM +0000, unknown source wrote: > OK so I didn't make any friends with this =o). My point no microsoft doesnt > make iso's for every bug but then again you dont have to know how to compile > your own kernel and all you have to do it double click on the patch so its > idiot proof and they dont have two bugs a week either but enough about bill > bates.Lets make it simple just go here and count see how we are comparing > to others o where not the worst lol look at mandrake > http://www.linuxsecurity.com/advisories/ but where not up there where I wish > we where with slackware,engarde,openbsd and a hand full of others and im > sorry if that doesnt make me real happy, sorry. Don't confuse lack of advisories with lack of security vulnerabilities. > OK I guess the real point here is we patch and keep patching all im > really trying to get at hear is "wouldn't it be nice to stabilize > then build a new release with more features?" example finish say 4.2 > were talking core only audited till its secure which I would say is > ummmmm now? reiso it. Then came 4.3 still going with the bugs there > and im sure more will be added with 4.4? This is my concern each > release has more function but also more to explore and more > exploiots on the way. You're ignorant of the problems here. The security vulnerabilities aren't (in general) being added over time, they're being found and fixed over time from code which has existed in many operating systems for a long time. It's probably wise to avoid making these kinds of bold claims about FreeBSD security when you're so ill-informed about it: it just makes you look foolish to the audience watching at home. > unreasonable, unwanted and so are any ideals I have to make freebsd > a little better for some I guess mainly newbies. As far as I can see, you're not doing anything to make FreeBSD better, you're just complaining. Don't mistake one for the other. Kris P.S. It's very hard to read your emails, please try and use some paragraphs and sentences, thanks. [-- Attachment #2 --] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (FreeBSD) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE7Y/YEWry0BWjoQKURAhz1AKDllbUfaqfMT1X8EoY7AxAtV8JmxQCfaBeo MrPXoqKqibEABrOkT+5Pz70= =b57S -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010729043948.A87542>