Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      20 Sep 2000 10:00:02 +0200
From:      Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@ofug.org>
To:        cjclark@alum.mit.edu
Cc:        Laurence Berland <stuyman@confusion.net>, Bill Fumerola <billf@chimesnet.com>, clefevre@citeweb.net, Akbar <Akbar@Aptitude.com.sg>, freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: wats so special about freeBSD?
Message-ID:  <xzpitrrze65.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no>
In-Reply-To: "Crist J . Clark"'s message of "Tue, 19 Sep 2000 22:12:42 -0700"
References:  <89731E9AF92BD411869200D0B71BB4DC0FC297@ASERVER> <200009191942.e8JJgMc03338@gits.dyndns.org> <20000920001652.U66839@jade.chc-chimes.com> <39C83CC6.9BCD1F32@confusion.net> <20000919221242.O367@149.211.6.64.reflexcom.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
"Crist J . Clark" <cjclark@reflexnet.net> writes:
> No, you are not. You partially answered your own question. OpenBSD is
> considered more secure because,
> 
>  (a) "They have done the big code audit." (You got that one.)
>  (b) They ship a secure default.
> 
> Not FreeBSD, nor any other open source OS I am aware of, has done
> (a). FreeBSD sacrifices (b) for having some stuff work "out of the
> box."

FreeBSD has done a lot more of (a) than you might think, and guess
what, Our People found some holes Their People hadn't spotted. So a
code audit is better than no code audit, but it's not a silver bullet.

DES
-- 
Dag-Erling Smorgrav - des@ofug.org


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?xzpitrrze65.fsf>