On Tue, Apr 13, 1999, Daniel C. Sobral wrote:
> What you really mean is that "FreeBSD is not a solution for public
> shell systems", correct? Public shell systems is not a bad idea,
> it's a business opportunity and a public service. If the OS is not
> up to the task, don't blame the task.

   If you close your eyes and run towards a brick wall with the
goal being to destroy it, and instead you injure yourself, it's
not your forehead's fault or the wall's fault (no matter how much
you cuss out the wall), but the person behind it.  If you were
strong and determined enough, perhaps you could solve the
problem, but your forehead wasn't meant to crash through walls by
default, and the brick wall wasn't meant to have a forehead plow
through it.

   Make any sense?

   The admin shouldn't expect a public shell service to be secure
out of the box with anything.  BSD/OS, Linux, FreeBSD, NetBSD,
OpenBSD - are any of these born shell service OS?  I doubt it.
It takes a hefty bit of 'tweaking', I'd imagine, to make a system
fit to run a public shell.

   In "theory", no OS I've heard of is a "solution" for shell
systems, at least out of the box and with an unexperienced

   Does this clear it up?

> --
> Daniel C. Sobral                      (8-DCS)
> d...@newsguy.com
> d...@freebsd.org
>       "nothing better than the ability to perform cunning linguistics"

Chris Costello                                <ch...@calldei.com>

Be careful when a loop exits to the same place from side and bottom.

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@freebsd.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message

Reply via email to