Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 13 Jul 2000 16:10:14 -0400 (EDT)
From:      Matt Heckaman <matt@ARPA.MAIL.NET>
To:        FreeBSD-SECURITY <freebsd-security@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: Two kinds of advisories?
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSF.4.21.0007131604020.67970-100000@epsilon.lucida.qc.ca>

next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hello,

The way I see it, this isn't a problem with our system so to speak, but
what our perfectly reasonable system does to our reputation. Go around to
the "security" web sites and see how many "ports" exploits are labeled as
"FreeBSD remote root exploit" or something equally alarming.

Stuff like the above really damages us out there in the real world you
know. Any idea how many times I hear "FreeBSD is an insecure OS!" with
many references to these "ports" advisories. So ok, they can't read and
report false information, that isn't OUR problem, is it? Simple fact is,
it IS our problem, as it turns new users off to FreeBSD.

These 'clueless' people could after a bit of time become the clueful, I
mean hey, we weren't ALWAYS clueful were we? You shouldn't allow such
misinformation to be propagated around the world. Would you rather that
FreeBSD /appears/ to be an insecure operating system?

* Matt Heckaman   - mailto:matt@lucida.qc.ca  http://www.lucida.qc.ca/ *
* GPG fingerprint - A9BC F3A8 278E 22F2 9BDA  BFCF 74C3 2D31 C035 5390 *

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.1 (FreeBSD)
Comment: http://www.lucida.qc.ca/pgp

iD8DBQE5biIndMMtMcA1U5ARAmJQAKCb0mOhzdb7cNlP01/LAxO0fS6gAgCfUXED
LmCPlKrRXTq2Gk638hmYAIc=
=l/Cu
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----




To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.21.0007131604020.67970-100000>