Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2003 16:32:48 +0100 From: Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@ofug.org> To: Paul Richards <paul@freebsd-services.com> Cc: "Jacques A. Vidrine" <nectar@FreeBSD.org>, "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com>, ru@FreeBSD.org, cjc@FreeBSD.org, src-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-src@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/netinet in_pcb.c Message-ID: <xzpheaxsl7j.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no> In-Reply-To: <20030221151709.GH68768@survey.codeburst.net> (Paul Richards's message of "Fri, 21 Feb 2003 15:17:09 %2B0000") References: <200302210528.h1L5SS0H092948@repoman.freebsd.org> <20030221131205.GE30966@sunbay.com> <20030221.062059.34122968.imp@bsdimp.com> <20030221135056.GA32007@madman.celabo.org> <20030221143149.GF68768@survey.codeburst.net> <xzpk7ftsnj1.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no> <20030221151709.GH68768@survey.codeburst.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Paul Richards <paul@freebsd-services.com> writes: > Yes, but if a lot of people start changing this setting and FreeBSD gets > a reputation for being insecure then we may wish we hadn't provided the > knob. The world's most widely used operating system has never placed restrictions on low-numbered ports. It *does* have a reputation for being insecure, but not for that reason (though some nutcases^Wpeople have argued that the vendor's decision to include the equivalent of raw sockets in their latest release marked the beginning of the end of the Internet, film at 11) DES -- Dag-Erling Smorgrav - des@ofug.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?xzpheaxsl7j.fsf>