From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jul 30 13:48:51 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 97EA528C for ; Tue, 30 Jul 2013 13:48:51 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from sthaug@nethelp.no) Received: from bizet.nethelp.no (bizet.nethelp.no [195.1.209.33]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id DC83E24C4 for ; Tue, 30 Jul 2013 13:48:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 52477 invoked from network); 30 Jul 2013 13:42:08 -0000 Received: from bizet.nethelp.no (HELO localhost) (195.1.209.33) by bizet.nethelp.no with SMTP; 30 Jul 2013 13:42:08 -0000 Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2013 15:42:08 +0200 (CEST) Message-Id: <20130730.154208.41672901.sthaug@nethelp.no> To: tevans.uk@googlemail.com Subject: Re: Bind in FreeBSD, security advisories From: sthaug@nethelp.no In-Reply-To: References: X-Mailer: Mew version 3.3 on Emacs 21.3 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: demelier.david@gmail.com, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2013 13:48:51 -0000 > > For years, a lot of security advisories have been present for bind. > > I'm just guessing if it's not a good idea to remove bind from base? > > > > This will probably free by half the number of FreeBSD SA's in the future. > > > > Sure, but no bind in base also implies no dig, nslookup or host. Exactly. It's a slippery slope - if we continue removing useful functionality from FreeBSD there are fewer and fewer arguments for why one should use FreeBSD and not Linux. Yes, I know everything can be installed from packages/ports. Two of *my* main reasons for using FreeBSD is that: 1. It's an integrated *system*, not just a kernel. 2. The base system contains a lot of the useful functionality I need. and every contrib part which is removed, detracts from this. YMMV. Steinar Haug, Nethelp consulting, sthaug@nethelp.no