Re: OT:Re: Apache Killer - Does it affect OpenBSD's patched version of Apache?
On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 19:51, frantisek holop min...@obiit.org wrote: why would i _not_ use another free alternative with a spotless security record, that has small, isolated processes communicating with each other in chroot, outputting very nice logs, having human readable configuration with fantastic documentation and as an added bonus an amazing mailing list where the author himself helps you out in difficult situations? http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/src/usr.sbin/smtpd/ It seems that none of the other daemons were a good fit. Cue OpenSMTPd.
Re: OT:Re: Apache Killer - Does it affect OpenBSD's patched version of Apache?
On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 10:11:52AM -0400, swilly wrote: On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 19:51, frantisek holop min...@obiit.org wrote: why would i _not_ use another free alternative with a spotless security record, that has small, isolated processes communicating with each other in chroot, outputting very nice logs, having human readable configuration with fantastic documentation and as an added bonus an amazing mailing list where the author himself helps you out in difficult situations? http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/src/usr.sbin/smtpd/ It seems that none of the other daemons were a good fit. Cue OpenSMTPd. I think he was mentionning Postfix. http://kerneltrap.org/mailarchive/openbsd-misc/2008/11/10/4051954 Gilles -- Gilles Chehade http://www.poolp.org/http://u.poolp.org/~gilles/
Re: OT:Re: Apache Killer - Does it affect OpenBSD's patched version of Apache?
hmm, on Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 04:23:18PM +0200, Gilles Chehade said that http://kerneltrap.org/mailarchive/openbsd-misc/2008/11/10/4051954 a mail you will probably never forgive me :] good luck with the project :] -f -- i know someone with the exact same name! really? who?
Re: OT:Re: Apache Killer - Does it affect OpenBSD's patched version of Apache?
On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 04:32:14PM +0200, frantisek holop wrote: hmm, on Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 04:23:18PM +0200, Gilles Chehade said that http://kerneltrap.org/mailarchive/openbsd-misc/2008/11/10/4051954 a mail you will probably never forgive me :] Not at all, I just recalled that rant because your name is uncommon enough :-) good luck with the project :] Thanks Gilles -- Gilles Chehade http://www.poolp.org/http://u.poolp.org/~gilles/
OT:Re: Apache Killer - Does it affect OpenBSD's patched version of Apache?
On 2011-08-30 19.27, frantisek holop wrote: the ports i personally dont care if it's in base or ports. sendmail and apache are really the only things in openbsd base that baffle me everytime i cross paths with them. they represent everything the openbsd philosophy refuses. What exactly is wrong with sendmail? Could you elaborate? Can you demonstrate how much less secure it is compared to any other alternative?
Re: OT:Re: Apache Killer - Does it affect OpenBSD's patched version of Apache?
On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 04:25:25PM -0400, Eric Furman wrote: On 2011-08-30 19.27, frantisek holop wrote: the ports i personally dont care if it's in base or ports. sendmail and apache are really the only things in openbsd base that baffle me everytime i cross paths with them. they represent everything the openbsd philosophy refuses. What exactly is wrong with sendmail? Could you elaborate? [...] /me slaps Eric Furman sorry, I assumed you were having a hysterical crisis ;-) -- Gilles Chehade http://www.poolp.org/http://u.poolp.org/~gilles/
Re: OT:Re: Apache Killer - Does it affect OpenBSD's patched version of Apache?
hmm, on Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 04:25:25PM -0400, Eric Furman said that On 2011-08-30 19.27, frantisek holop wrote: the ports i personally dont care if it's in base or ports. sendmail and apache are really the only things in openbsd base that baffle me everytime i cross paths with them. they represent everything the openbsd philosophy refuses. What exactly is wrong with sendmail? Could you elaborate? Can you demonstrate how much less secure it is compared to any other alternative? this is not strictly about security but sendmail as a system to configure and maintain and support. everybody's mileage varies, so if you happy with your sendmail, just murmur poor guy and move on. but what is wrong with sendmail? whole books have been written about that. where do you want to start? the monster monolithic structure? the configuration process? why would i _not_ use another free alternative with a spotless security record, that has small, isolated processes communicating with each other in chroot, outputting very nice logs, having human readable configuration with fantastic documentation and as an added bonus an amazing mailing list where the author himself helps you out in difficult situations? .. because that sounds like all the other openbsd daemons to me.. -f ps. ok, some really really die hard openbsd fans would not use it because it doesn't have pf-inspired syntax :] (but neither does sendmail) -- number of vulcans to replace a bulb? precisely 1.00.
