Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 12:24:46 +0200 From: dick hoogendijk <dick@nagual.st> To: freebsd-questions <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Pros and Cons of running under inetd.... Message-ID: <20060513102445.GA33270@arwen.nagual.st> In-Reply-To: <44652BFA.6000002@computer.org> References: <4464B95D.1040702@computer.org> <20060512171515.GC34035@catflap.slightlystrange.org> <4464CEDA.80906@computer.org> <6.0.0.22.2.20060512152402.026a60c8@mail.computinginnovations.com> <6.2.3.4.2.20060512163433.02e85298@mailsvr.xxiii.com> <6.0.0.22.2.20060512165738.026575c0@mail.computinginnovations.com> <44652BFA.6000002@computer.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 12 May Eric Schuele wrote: > Derek Ragona wrote: > >Yes it is still true today. The default system now has inetd running > >nothing. And the ports now install rc scripts for these reasons. > > Not arguing here... everything I've found on the web says something > similar. > > But why do we have inetd? I assume it solved a problem in the past, > that no longer exists. Not to mention its spotted security history. > > >For network daemons, when they are running in a listen mode there is > >no real overhead on the system. OK, I run inetd for just these two services: # # FAM: File Alteration Monitor [devel/fam] sgi_fam/1-2 stream rpc/tcp wait root /usr/local/bin/fam fam # # an appropriate block rule to your pf.conf # ftp-proxy stream tcp nowait root /usr/libexec/ftp-proxy ftp-proxy If inetd is a security risk how can I change these things to work without inetd? As I understand thare is no other way, but I'm very keen on learning ;-) -- dick -- http://nagual.st/ -- PGP/GnuPG key: F86289CE ++ Running FreeBSD 6.1 ++ The Power to Serve
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060513102445.GA33270>