Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 20:55:55 +0200 From: Roelof Osinga <roelof@nisser.com> To: Kris Kennaway <kris@FreeBSD.ORG> Cc: cjclark@home.com, freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: BUGTRAQ Vulnerabilities Stats Message-ID: <392199BB.1F5058CA@nisser.com> References: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0005151444460.91431-100000@freefall.freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Kris Kennaway wrote: > > On Mon, 15 May 2000, Crist J. Clark wrote: > > > FreeBSD has the most of the *BSD listed (Free, Net, and Open) with > > 1999 having quite a spike (but almost all OSes have a spike in > > '99). The big 2.2 to 3 jump is probably a big part of that. > > I also think they're counting ports among the FreeBSD vulnerabilities, > which gives us an unfair disadvantage because often in fact the > vulnerability is not anything freebsd-specific, it was just first > publicized as being "vulnerable on FreeBSD". > ... Not just that, but I also noticed they're listing IIS (4.0 and 5.0) separately from the OS for NT. NT being the only OS it's been ported to, does that mean the figures for those should be added to the ones for the OS? Same holds for BackOffice. Yet in that list there are no separate categories for the *nix apps. Or even the distinction between OS and non-OS bugs. Roelof -- Dog's home @ http://cairni.com/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?392199BB.1F5058CA>