From owner-freebsd-security  Mon Dec 16 05:27:50 1996
Return-Path: <owner-security>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.4/8.8.4) id FAA29035
          for security-outgoing; Mon, 16 Dec 1996 05:27:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: from eel.dataplex.net (eel.dataplex.net [208.2.87.2])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.4/8.8.4) with ESMTP id FAA29028
          for <security@freebsd.org>; Mon, 16 Dec 1996 05:27:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [208.2.87.4] (cod [208.2.87.4])
          by eel.dataplex.net (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id HAA23928;
          Mon, 16 Dec 1996 07:27:56 -0600 (CST)
X-Sender: rkw@mail.dataplex.net
Message-Id: <l03010d01aedafa892fb5@[208.2.87.4]>
In-Reply-To: <32b5c1243534002@molhub.mol.net.my>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 1996 07:17:20 -0600
To: Mun Fai WONG <mfwong@mol.net.my>
From: Richard Wackerbarth <rkw@dataplex.net>
Subject: Re: FreeBSD vs BorderWare
Cc: security@freebsd.org
Sender: owner-security@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

>1) It is based on a secured OS phillosophy
>2) It is "commercially" backed by the vendor
>3) It has been tested
>4) Availability of the source to the modified kernel is impossible compared
>to     FreeBSD as FreeBSD is a very "open" software distribution with source
>codes    freely available.

"Security through Obscurity" is a very false sense of security.
It also leaves you at the mercy of the vendor. Sometimes, "commercial"
support is worse than no support. There are a number of
individuals/companies who will be happy to provide support-for-hire for
FreeBSD. With FreeBSD you have the added advantage that you have support
options. You can do it yourself with lots of help on the net. You can also
hire someone for support. And if you are not pleased with them, you can
select another.