Tony Lambiris wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 04, 2000 at 03:53:04PM -0400, Derek Martin wrote:
> > Even if you use a *BSD, if you don't spend time making sure you've got
> > your sh*t together, you're a fool. So yawn all you like. I can make
> > RedHat 6.2 acceptibly secure in about an hour. I consider that a wise
> > investment.
>
> Gee, why do I feel like I am beating a dead horse? How many times do I have to
> say that OpenBSD requires less time to secure, due to the fact they set up
> their system _properly_.
>
> > That's a blanket statement, which is extremely foolish. So you're saying
> > when someone releases a security fix, I should wait a few months to get
> > it? Absurd.
>
> I didn't say security fix, I said the latest and greatest application. Do
> you understand this? Here's an example for the people who can't grasp my
> statement...
>
> ApplicationX 1.2.3 comes out. In the meantime, ApplicationX2.0.1 development
> has begun. Uh oh! Someone found a hole in 1.2.3. Time to release a patch/update
> for 1.2.3. Development of 2.0.1 continues and is stable enough to 'use'.
> Instead of downloading the latest and greatest app (2.0.1), continue to use
> 1.2.3, and monitor ApplicationX's website for any new patches to 1.2.3.
>
> --
> Tony Lambiris [[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> OpenBSD: Because I care. [www.openbsd.org]
>
> **********************************************************
> To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the following text in the
> *body* (*not* the subject line) of the letter:
> unsubscribe gnhlug
> **********************************************************
openBSD has not been cracked (remote) in almost 3 years, off a default
installation. pretty tough to beat there...... redhat has said that they are
planning automaic security system updates, but the real issue on hand is all the
new users relying on a hand plattered system that is secure. basic computer
knowledge as far as i know is still needed and is not with most of you new users
today. so editing a file to cover you a$$ is trivial, well supposed to be.
so to understand tony's point is trivial to "default installation and security
minded developers". man this place (list)is a blazing feeeasco today. i think im
getting lost here........
cmd
**********************************************************
To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] with the following text in the
*body* (*not* the subject line) of the letter:
unsubscribe gnhlug
**********************************************************
