From owner-freebsd-questions  Fri Feb  8 15:25:58 2002
Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Received: from hotmail.com (f100.law11.hotmail.com [64.4.17.100])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CCD7137B404
	for <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>; Fri,  8 Feb 2002 15:25:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC;
	 Fri, 8 Feb 2002 15:25:53 -0800
Received: from 68.6.89.248 by lw11fd.law11.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP;
	Fri, 08 Feb 2002 23:25:53 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [68.6.89.248]
From: "Charles Burns" <burnscharlesn@hotmail.com>
To: raiden23@netzero.net, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Breaking permissions on Windows 2000 (Server Edition)
Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2002 16:25:53 -0700
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Message-ID: <F100mDvHbYxPoLMOEYz000057c8@hotmail.com>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 08 Feb 2002 23:25:53.0700 (UTC) FILETIME=[F3D02640:01C1B0F7]
Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <freebsd-questions.FreeBSD.ORG>
List-Archive: <http://docs.freebsd.org/mail/> (Web Archive)
List-Help: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=help> (List Instructions)
List-Subscribe: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=subscribe%20freebsd-questions>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=unsubscribe%20freebsd-questions>
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

>         My only assumption on this is he mis-spoke himself, cause I have
>yet to see any version of windows that's more secure than Unix.  Heck,
>window 3.1 and Dos 6.2 are even more secure than anything since
>them.  Heck, they haven't even produced anything decently respectable since
>then.
>
>> > Fortunately, Windows isn't that much worse than Multics, and is
>> > considerably more secure than UNIX.
>>
>>HAHAHAHAHAHAAH!!!  hehehe...  hohoho.  <whew!>

Which Unix? RH 6.0 with everything running has more holes than Windows 2000 
with the latest patch (at least, more known holes :)
I got the impression that he was saying that Multics is secure (which it 
is/was), and Unix is insecure which, relative to Multics, it is. (at least, 
design-wise)
I doubt that anyone would say with a straight face that a Windows server 
using, say, IIS, is more secure than a (say) FreeBSD or Solaris server 
running Apache or Zeus. Both systems can be secured; both systems need to be 
patched all too often, and both systems should be behind a good firewall. 
(All of the above: IMHO)


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp.


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