From owner-freebsd-questions Wed Jul 14 21:59:43 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from pinnacle.co.nz (pinnacle.internet.co.nz [210.48.55.133]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3F42154DB for ; Wed, 14 Jul 1999 21:59:20 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jonc@pinnacle.co.nz) Received: from kiwi.pinnacle.co.nz (kiwi.pinnacle.co.nz [202.37.163.2]) by pinnacle.co.nz (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA06748; Thu, 15 Jul 1999 16:49:19 +1200 (NZST) Date: Thu, 15 Jul 1999 16:49:19 +1200 (NZST) From: Jonathan Chen To: James Gill Cc: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: is having the ports secure? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Wed, 14 Jul 1999, James Gill wrote: > > Hi.. > > If i'm trying to make a secure installation (for example a firewall box) > that will run only a finite set of services (NAT, firewalling, DNS, and not > very much else), wouldn't it be better (more secure) to not install the > whole ports collection but only the specific ports for the services I want? Yup. And the quick way to do this is to set up rc.conf *NOT* to run inetd. Jonathan Chen ---------------------------------------------------------------------- "Nyuck, nyuck, nyuck!" - Curly To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message