From owner-freebsd-chat  Sun Jun  8 08:02:22 1997
Return-Path: <owner-chat>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id IAA15624
          for chat-outgoing; Sun, 8 Jun 1997 08:02:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ohm.ingsala.unal.edu.co ([168.176.15.18])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id IAA15615
          for <freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG>; Sun, 8 Jun 1997 08:02:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from unalmodem.usc.unal.edu.co (unalmodem01.usc.unal.edu.co [168.176.3.31])
	by ohm.ingsala.unal.edu.co (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id KAA04746;
	Sun, 8 Jun 1997 10:03:36 -0500 (COT)
Message-ID: <339AE4C9.5BD1@fps.biblos.unal.edu.co>
Date: Sun, 08 Jun 1997 09:58:50 -0700
From: "Pedro F. Giffuni" <pgiffuni@fps.biblos.unal.edu.co>
Organization: Universidad Nacional de Colombia
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; I)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Joshua Fielden <shag@concentric.net>
CC: freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: Exchange vs. Notes
References: <199706070628.XAA01055@MindBender.serv.net> <3399782F.F933CA56@concentric.net> <339A6659.3B9F@fps.biblos.unal.edu.co> <339A55A6.3583874A@concentric.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-chat@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

Joshua Fielden wrote:
> 
> >
> > The great advantage of NT over UNIX is security: they certified C2
> > security...IF you unplug it from the network and don't use your floppy
> > drives :-)
> >
> >         Pedro
> > > JF
> 
> But remember the old adage... "any computer with a human user is
> insecure." :-) 

I was precisely noting that NT is secure ONLY IF no one uses it. Yes
there are security problems reported under NT, especially after their
so-called certification. M$ admitted their certification was only valid
if NT is unaccesible to a human being.
NT is very different from W95: NT is a microkernel that was conceived
from the start to compete with UNIX. NT is more secure than UNIX because
it doesn't support (natively) telnet, ftp, sendmail and the other
services we know. NT's security is achievable under UNIX, but who would
like to comment all the services in inetd.conf and replace them with the
MSN?
I wouldn't buy exchange because I can only use it with an M$ OS. Notes
deserves the try. BTW anyone knows if SCO's version runs under FreeBSD?

	Pedro.

> --
> SCSI is *not* magic.  There are many technical
> reasons why it is occasionally nessicary to
> sacrifice a small goat to your SCSI chain.
>  --Joshua Fielden