Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 22:28:21 -0700 From: "Ted Mittelstaedt" <tedm@toybox.placo.com> To: "Kris Kennaway" <kris@obsecurity.org>, "Gary Kline" <kline@ns1.thought.org> Cc: "John Baxter" <jbaxter@mmcable.com>, "Dan Mahoney, System Admin" <danm@prime.gushi.org>, <questions@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: RE: onitoring named Message-ID: <009801c0dcff$db26d3e0$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> In-Reply-To: <20010514204716.A94166@xor.obsecurity.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>-----Original Message----- >From: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG >[mailto:owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG]On Behalf Of Kris Kennaway > >Yes, there are in general lots of reasons why things like named dump >core, but in the case of named it's (at the present time) most likely >to be the reason already given, and once that's ruled out analysis can >proceed to other causes. > Spoken like someone who is more interested in seeing the world's nameservers running an invulnerable version of Bind than in actually fixing problems. While frustrating crackers is a laudable goal, you might as well just be honest and come right out and say it! ;-) Ted Mittelstaedt tedm@toybox.placo.com Author of: The FreeBSD Corporate Networker's Guide Book website: http://www.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?009801c0dcff$db26d3e0$1401a8c0>