Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2001 02:40:31 -0800 From: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> To: "K . Greenwood" <k_greenwood1@sluggy.net> Cc: benf@nexgen.com, freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: BSD Strains Message-ID: <20010306024031.A41427@mollari.cthul.hu> In-Reply-To: <20010305041145.256BD36FA@sitemail.everyone.net>; from k_greenwood1@sluggy.net on Sun, Mar 04, 2001 at 08:11:45PM -0800 References: <20010305041145.256BD36FA@sitemail.everyone.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--SLDf9lqlvOQaIe6s Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, Mar 04, 2001 at 08:11:45PM -0800, K . Greenwood wrote: > Considering no one else has responded, I may as well give a generic respo= nse.... >=20 > FreeBSD is a BSD that is based on the x86 architecture. >=20 > NetBSD is portable... to everything. >=20 > OpenBSD is secure. Apparently, auditing of code is standard. Hey now, FreeBSD is secure too :-) It's true that OpenBSD have done more auditing work than FreeBSD has, but it's not like we're standing still here -- the FreeBSD auditing project is producing results. OpenBSD is a fine operating system, but in fact they have had a number of serious exploits in the past year which FreeBSD fixed a number of years ago or was never vulnerable to. Kris --SLDf9lqlvOQaIe6s Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.4 (FreeBSD) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE6pL6fWry0BWjoQKURAvLAAKCmwkGEp+TUP7kUWFL8cFnCt6ATjwCg+L76 RwKDehpuL9H02fc5WI4VcTk= =8tKt -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --SLDf9lqlvOQaIe6s-- 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?20010306024031.A41427>