From owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Sep 13 00:54:10 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10855A84; Fri, 13 Sep 2013 00:54:10 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kpaasial@gmail.com) Received: from mail-wg0-x232.google.com (mail-wg0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c00::232]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 78CFB2AB4; Fri, 13 Sep 2013 00:54:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-wg0-f50.google.com with SMTP id f12so512126wgh.29 for ; Thu, 12 Sep 2013 17:54:07 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=b7Bl7TWvcZZtfQo0UcBYwWHQXWnsMRG6lHLe0hqmNCs=; b=emGrwsjwA9wP+2bhsPnkPz6Xarm/ExWa/VANabT1XVemyerMTRPXafbKi9R527xoTk +cBgO+eo0vINdw6k/qdFE2KgQYsuMbbKiN0JI9Xln+pAB33Q302nBhECgQZB/tb+aGC0 TOp9alc80hQ4flgUx+RuwvggNGFmX5PGnAhhYzQxh4Z+zk4JEhaz2Ki1k1lqQ1HkbRa3 3nYyY4XF3xvdLgUUzTJXfd+eaNi13lCih8403vmucKFezmRxLxIick0wMZp2xET/iEEA rHmbXv4zmrSJ4zucTizANF0Bb97T9d2iyh+wdivqN/sfdaC41IbRSObidHV0+pxVKMSk O3qw== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.180.206.42 with SMTP id ll10mr402623wic.50.1379033647891; Thu, 12 Sep 2013 17:54:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.216.180.2 with HTTP; Thu, 12 Sep 2013 17:54:07 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <20130912053559.GF68682@funkthat.com> <979901F9-5F25-4DF1-95A8-32473C55B25F@gmail.com> <52320144.2090807@freebsd.org> <201309130040.SAA28208@mail.lariat.net> Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2013 03:54:07 +0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: FreeBSD Transient Memory problem? From: Kimmo Paasiala To: Jonathon Wright Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: "freebsd-security@freebsd.org" , Guy Helmer , Julian Elischer , John-Mark Gurney X-BeenThere: freebsd-security@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Security issues \[members-only posting\]" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2013 00:54:10 -0000 On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 3:47 AM, Jonathon Wright wrote: > Thanks Brett, > > That item just made it to the top of the argument list I'm formulating > right now from everyone's input. =) > That makes a very strong argument for the OS as "approved". > > > On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 2:39 PM, Brett Glass wrote: > >> One other point of possible interest which points out how silly >> this whole thing is. >> >> While the NIAP Web site does not list FreeBSD as a "compliant" >> operating system product, it lists Juniper routers, which run an >> embedded version of FreeBSD, as compliant. See >> >> https://www.niap-ccevs.org/**CCEVS_Products/pcl.cfm?tech_**name=Router >> >> There may be other products which have "FreeBSD inside" on their >> list as well. >> >> --Brett Glass >> >> Unfortunately that might just mean that the company behind Juniper has payed enough money to get their product certified while basic FreeBSD remains uncertified. All this certification business is corruption if you ask me. -Kimmo