From owner-freebsd-advocacy Tue Apr 27 8:36:41 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from cygnus.rush.net (cygnus.rush.net [209.45.245.133]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81B60151A1 for ; Tue, 27 Apr 1999 08:36:33 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from bright@rush.net) Received: from localhost (bright@localhost) by cygnus.rush.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id KAA23045; Tue, 27 Apr 1999 10:54:37 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 27 Apr 1999 10:54:35 -0500 (EST) From: Alfred Perlstein To: Dan Langille Cc: Nicole Harrington , advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: FreeBSD Security In-Reply-To: <19990427070056.XPFP6531620.mta2-rme@wocker> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Tue, 27 Apr 1999, Dan Langille wrote: > On 26 Apr 99, at 23:25, Nicole Harrington wrote: > > > > > There is a cool mailing list called the Sans Security Mailing that is > > kindof > > like a condensed bugtrack and cert mailing. I rather liked one entry it > > contained in it's listing of security bugs for all OS's. > > > > --------------- > > FreeBSD: > > No FreeBSD security reports have been released since 11/04/1998. > > --------------- > > > > Not many os's could claim that. > > Grin. Pretty good. > > But it brought to mind something about a CEO comparing Mac and Windows. > He claimed that Mac must have lots of bugs in it because bug fixes were > issued "all the time" but Windows must have no bugs because they hardly > ever issue any bug fixes. Yes but there's a difference, I'm unaware of any major FreeBSD security hole since the /proc hole about 2 years ago that wasn't the fault of a "contributed" program. If you want to see feature improvements and bugfixes look at cvs-all@freebsd.org. *BSD has a decade and a half of work put into it so far, what other OS can really say that? -Alfred To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message