On Tue, Apr 17, 2001 at 07:44:38PM +1000, DaZZa uttered:
> On Tue, 17 Apr 2001, D.V.Rogers wrote:
>
> Both have drawbacks - NFS is particularly dangerous if the machines are
> connected to the internet, as it requires ports open which have *huge*
> security holes - but Samba also leaves a bit to be desired, because it
> relies on the buggy SMB protocol from M$, and there are some holes in that
> too.
>
Oi! NFS is just like Unix. It's powerful enough to do what you want, but when you go
to shoot yourself in the foot, it ends up blowing your leg off. (Or is that Solaris?)
NFS machines are only (and this is a generalisation for NFS-only machines) a hazard if
a fairly pedantic firewall isn't setup, and tcp-wrappers aren't configured properly.
--
Steve
"I'm a sysadmin because I couldn't beat a blind monkey in a coding contest."
--Me
--
SLUG - Sydney Linux User Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
More Info: http://slug.org.au/lists/listinfo/slug
