From owner-freebsd-security@freebsd.org Wed Jul 24 19:29:26 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-security@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 862F3B6175 for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2019 19:29:26 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from stephen.wall@redcom.com) Received: from smtp1.redcom.com (smtp1.redcom.com [192.86.3.143]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 02E866F7AA for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2019 19:29:25 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from stephen.wall@redcom.com) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp1.redcom.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D204EA317 for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2019 15:29:19 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at redcom.com Received: from smtp1.redcom.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp1.redcom.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id AuQxy4x1pL33 for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2019 15:29:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pie.redcom.com (pie [192.168.33.15]) by smtp1.redcom.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A112A2D1 for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2019 15:29:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: from exch-02.redcom.com (exch-03.redcom.com [192.168.32.32]) by pie.redcom.com (8.11.7p1+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id x6OJTHf03346 for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2019 15:29:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: from exch-02.redcom.com (fd00::ccaa:c259:22f8:6f4b) by exch-03.redcom.com (fd00::8549:68c0:3d5f:ee62) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384) id 15.2.330.5; Wed, 24 Jul 2019 15:29:16 -0400 Received: from exch-02.redcom.com ([fe80::ccaa:c259:22f8:6f4b]) by exch-02.redcom.com ([fe80::ccaa:c259:22f8:6f4b%12]) with mapi id 15.00.1473.003; Wed, 24 Jul 2019 15:29:16 -0400 From: "Wall, Stephen" To: "freebsd-security@freebsd.org" Subject: RE: Old Stuff Thread-Topic: Old Stuff Thread-Index: AQHVQkELTef/j3zLO0aBV4HMvyHzv6baR5CA///Ys2A= Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2019 19:29:16 +0000 Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [192.168.84.20] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 02E866F7AA X-Spamd-Bar: -- Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of stephen.wall@redcom.com designates 192.86.3.143 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=stephen.wall@redcom.com X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-2.53 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-0.96)[-0.956,0]; HAS_XOIP(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip4:192.86.3.143/32]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; PREVIOUSLY_DELIVERED(0.00)[freebsd-security@freebsd.org]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[redcom.com]; RCPT_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-0.99)[-0.994,0]; IP_SCORE(-0.01)[country: US(-0.05)]; MX_GOOD(-0.01)[smtp1.redcom.com]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.36)[-0.361,0]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE(0.00)[143.3.86.192.list.dnswl.org : 127.0.10.0]; TO_DN_EQ_ADDR_ALL(0.00)[]; RCVD_NO_TLS_LAST(0.10)[]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; ASN(0.00)[asn:46679, ipnet:192.86.3.0/24, country:US]; RCVD_COUNT_SEVEN(0.00)[7] X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 24 Jul 2019 20:04:30 +0000 X-BeenThere: freebsd-security@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Security issues \[members-only posting\]" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2019 19:29:26 -0000 > From: owner-freebsd-security@freebsd.org [mailto:owner-freebsd- > security@freebsd.org] On Behalf Of Aaron C. de Bruyn via freebsd- > security > Subject: Re: Old Stuff >=20 >On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 9:58 AM Robert Simmons wrote= : > >> I wonder if FreeBSD should drop support for 32bit? Clean out and remove = all >> of it. It should make the code base easier to maintain, cleaner, and saf= er. >> >> In this same vein, let's deprecate and remove things like telnet and ftp= . > > Why remove telnet and FTP? Why not? It's not difficult to install ftp as needed from the ports tree = - there are a number of clients and servers available there, including a ne= wer version of tnftp, which is what appears in freebsd base. I can't imagi= ne it would be very difficult to migrate the base telnet to ports, either. = It'd be a bit less cruft in the base system that has to be maintained. Th= at applies to tftp as well. Unless the base system is actually using any of them. I don't know that. > From: owner-freebsd-security@freebsd.org [mailto:owner-freebsd- > security@freebsd.org] On Behalf Of Igor Mozolevsky > Subject: Re: Old Stuff >=20 > On Wednesday, 24 July 2019, Robert Simmons wrote: > > I wonder if FreeBSD should drop support for 32bit? Clean out and remove= all > > of it. It should make the code base easier to maintain, cleaner, and sa= fer. >=20 > Because nobody has a 32bit computer nowadays??? Similarly, you got any > empirical evidence to back up the "... safer" part of your speculation? I have to agree with Igor here - there are still 32-bit SOCs out there inte= nded for embedded use. It's likely there are commercial users of FreeBSD de= veloping for those platforms. -spw