TO UNSUBSCRIBE: email "unsubscribe issforum" in the body of your message to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] for help with any problems!
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
RealSecure on NT simply could not handle the load of the busy network we
had it on. Memory leaks abounded. Solaris is _much_ better, although
we've been dealing with some RS bugs that seem to be fixed now. Also,
IMO, Solaris can be reliably locked down much better than NT and is much
more easily managed remotely (and securely). SSHd and RealSecure
servers--try that on NT.
-Jason
On Fri, 7 Jul 2000, Arie Elkins wrote:
> Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2000 11:27:45 -0400
> From: Arie Elkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RealSecure NT vs Solaris
>
>
> TO UNSUBSCRIBE: email "unsubscribe issforum" in the body of your message to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] for help with any problems!
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Hello,
> I just have a quick question reguarding RealSecure. Are there any
> differences whatsoever between the RealSecure Engine on NT and on Solaris?
> I ask this because we often integrate a RealSecure solution for our clients,
> and sometimes they ask what the difference is. Other times they just assume
> that solaris is better becuase it's not NT. Anything you all can give me
> would be much appreciated. Thank you.
>
> Arie Elkins
> The Athena Group
>
>
>
>
--
AT&T Wireless Services
IT Security
UNIX Security Operations Specialist
