From owner-freebsd-stable Thu Aug 24 15:14:37 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mail.denverweb.net (xenu.denverweb.net [199.45.153.14]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 2648437B423 for ; Thu, 24 Aug 2000 15:14:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 61723 invoked from network); 24 Aug 2000 22:12:38 -0000 Received: from fc-pm3-01.enetis.net (HELO denverweb.net) (208.168.188.160) by xenu.denverweb.net with SMTP; 24 Aug 2000 22:12:38 -0000 Message-ID: <39A59E49.E3EE1196@denverweb.net> Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 16:14:33 -0600 From: blaine X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (X11; I; Linux 2.2.12 i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Bill Fumerola Cc: "Gooderum, Mark" , freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: nuking "unsafe" protocols (was Re: Upcoming rc.conf changes not loading certain currently loaded daemons) References: <251BF6012D6B4A49A4109B1C3289A7B5BB78@purgatory.jumpweb.com> <39A59992.F42F03EC@denverweb.net> <20000824180051.D57333@jade.chc-chimes.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Bill Fumerola wrote: > On Thu, Aug 24, 2000 at 03:54:26PM -0600, blaine wrote: > > > Umm, why not just use openbsd if security is the primary concern? > > Because no operating system overcomes stupidity. True, but you have to do something insecure _on purpose_ .... out of the box, OpenBSD pretty tight, and you have to open services knowingly. FreeBSD is less secure as a default, and you have to work to close services down. I am sure that with little effort FreeBSD could be made more secure by default. In todays world, that is not really a bad thing. Perhaps an install option where you can choose the security model you want. Of course, the real difference between genius and stupidity is, Genius has it's limits. :-P Cheers, Blaine To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message