As others have said, the security of a system is more a function of the admin running it than anything else... A great admin running Windows 2000 is by far better off than a complete moron running OpenBSD... Also, don't put too much weight into the Orange Book rating of a system as it does not take the networking functionality into account when rating the system... Not to mention, those ratings are dependent on certain configurations that you will most likely not adopt... For myself, I choose OpenBSD for all of my critical servers....
thanks, shawn On Wed, 2002-06-12 at 14:34, Shutters, Mike wrote: > Take a look here: > > http://www.radium.ncsc.mil/tpep/epl/epl-by-class.html > > It looks like HP UX is the only Unix OS that has made it into the B1 > Security class. However, other evaluations of more current OSs aren't > listed. The usual qualification applies, "it depends." There are $$$$ to > consider, plus training and hardware........... > > For security-enhanced Linux, you can look at: > http://www.nsa.gov/selinux/index.html > > Good luck! > > Mike > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Robert M. Judy [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2002 12:53 PM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: most secure Unix type > > > > What is generally considered to be the "most secure" (or securable) > > Unix/Linux package/version? > > > > Thanks in advance, > > > > > > rmj -- email: pakkit at codepiranha dot org web: http://codepiranha.org/~pakkit pgp key: [EMAIL PROTECTED] pgp: 8988 6FB6 3CFE FE6D 548E 98FB CCE9 6CA9 98FC 665A having problems reading email from me? http://codepiranha.org/~pakkit/pgp.html
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
