Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 20:47:12 +0000 (GMT) From: ob1k <ob1k@mindspring.com> To: Marco Molteni <molter@tin.it> Cc: freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: disapointing security architecture Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.05.9903102045370.294-100000@Cupcake.mindspring.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.96.990311004326.7116A-100000@nympha>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Im sorry, but comments like: 3. disappointed about FreeBSD security architecture? Fix it. are such a copout and a really lame way of reasoning. On Thu, 11 Mar 1999, Marco Molteni wrote: > On Wed, 10 Mar 1999, Janos Mohacsi wrote: > > [..] > > > An other point OpenBSD made some steps forward: they have IPSec (PF_KEY > > v2 !!). > > 1. PF_KEY != IPsec. > 2. Anyway, FreeBSD has IPsec too. Go get KAME IPv6/IPsec at > www.kame.net. FreeBSD IPsec will become a merge of KAME, NRL, INRIA. > 3. disappointed about FreeBSD security architecture? Fix it. > > [..] > > Marco > --- > "Hi, I have a Compaq machine running Windows 95. How do I install FreeBSD?" > "I'm sorry, this is device driver testing: brain implants are two doors > down on the right". (Bill Paul, on the freebsd-net mailing list) > > > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.05.9903102045370.294-100000>