Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2009 12:39:01 -0800 From: Charlie Kester <corky1951@comcast.net> To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Subject: Re: why BSDs got no love (and why security gets no love) Message-ID: <20091229203901.GD25393@comcast.net> In-Reply-To: <87oclhzvz4.fsf@kobe.laptop> References: <541b7a870912150733m4bc34148j98790a6142d4521c@mail.gmail.com> <20091223103226.GC26235@guilt.hydra> <20091223235651.GA31167@guilt.hydra> <87oclhzvz4.fsf@kobe.laptop>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue 29 Dec 2009 at 06:38:23 PST Giorgos Keramidas wrote: >On Wed, 23 Dec 2009 16:56:51 -0700, Chad Perrin <perrin@apotheon.com> wrote: >> Update: >> >> I confirmed that the scheduled publication date for my article will be >> Tuesday the 29th. > >It's up at http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/security/?p=2888 > Well done, Chad! One question, however. Are we prepared to back up the claim that the "sexy" bits of PC-BSD are the least secure? Your argument depends on that claim, since it's also implied in your description of development team's priorities.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20091229203901.GD25393>