On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 03:09:58PM -0700, Larry Price wrote: > On Wed, 15 May 2002, Ronald LeVine wrote: > > > > > I was not suggesting that completely erradicating malcode was possible but > > we can sure slow it way down. The fact is that Sys-admins are generally not > > living up to their responsibility on this. The time has come to do so. The > > web has had serious outages already. This could have been prevented to some > > extent with a good security policy in place at the individual server level.
I wasn't suggesting eliminating malcode altogether either. I suggested OpenBSD because, well, it's designed "with a good security policy ... at the individual server level." > The problem is that there is an inherent tension between security and > usefullness. Really? Or is it just a "percieved" usefullness? I mean, is it really more usefull, as in more work getting done, when the so called "usefullness" is causing entire networks to be useless? > For instance I would like to be able to deal with the windows virus > problem by adding the following to my .procmailrc There's procmail for windows? At the user level, this will only save you from getting windows viruses in your mailbox. I doubt your *nix mailer is going to be affected by a windows virus. And if you do access your mail with a vulnerable client, well ... Yes, I understand the argument, and google has the answers -> http://www.google.com/search?q=Linux+email+server+virus+scanner -- <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
