mailing list archives
Re: Re: Microsoft Security, baby steps ?
From: Guido van Rooij <guido () gvr org>
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 09:04:01 +0100
On Wed, Mar 17, 2004 at 12:52:55PM +0100, Daniele Muscetta wrote:
Dave Horsfall said:
On Wed, 17 Mar 2004, Daniele Muscetta wrote:
....I know, you roughly have some 26 Megabytes of patches to be
installed POST-SP4 and POST IE60SP1 on W2K.
Is any other OS any better lately ?
OpenBSD. FreeBSD. NetBSD. BSD/OS. See the pattern?
Yes I do.
Even if patching of a BSD box is not something that anybody can do, just
like everyone uses windowsupdate / up2date / yast / apt-get and
...you know what I mean: grab the source code patch / diff file, patch the
code, recompile... and possibly recompile everything that is statically
linked to that component/library....On big server farms this could still be annoying... not to say the
obvious, like I cannot imagine my mum managing being able to do ANYTHING
with such an OS, while she CAN windowsupdate (and she does) :)
FreeBSD has freebsd-update nowadays.
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
RE: Re: Microsoft Security, baby steps ? Nick FitzGerald (Mar 17)
RE: Re: Microsoft Security, baby steps ? Stuart Fox (DSL AK) (Mar 17)
RE: Re: Microsoft Security, baby steps ? John . Airey (Mar 17)
RE: Re: Microsoft Security, baby steps ? Jos Osborne (Mar 17)