On Sun, 12 Aug 2001, likot wrote:
>
> --- Leo Pascua <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > BSD is secured than Slackware Sys. co'z , i'm using
> > BSD for five years
>
> secured? is it not that security relies more on the
> one administering rather than the OS?
yes but some systems are SO BROKEN that it's a nightmare for sysads
maintaining them (read: Windows NT and those products "built with NT
Technology")
>
> Yes bsd's have a reputation of being secure ( openbsd
> ?!? ) but then again this OS's has proven to be
> vulnerable to security breaches too.
especially the server programs, lpd, wu-ftpd, bind, portmap...
>
> 1. in our years of experience hopefully we grew a clue
> that there is no such thing as a secured (i.e.
> uncrackable system)
as i said before, take a server, power it down, unplug all cables, shove
it into a bank vault, seal it, and melt the keys/combination lock. You
have an uncrackable server!
> 3. bad administration leads to security breaches (
> THIS IS OS INDEPENDENT)
True!
_
Philippine Linux Users Group. Web site and archives at http://plug.linux.org.ph
To leave: send "unsubscribe" in the body to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To subscribe to the Linux Newbies' List: send "subscribe" in the body to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
