OpenBSD is good, no disputing that. Linux is also good - but both depend on their administrator to be secure. A well adminned Linux box beats an adminless BSD machine.
The same argument could be extended (and often is) that a well-adminned Windoes box can be an effective firewall. This is technically true, but there are loads more gotcha's in Windows security. Admin error is likely to be the most common reason for firewall penetration over the next few years. Cheers, Marty -----Original Message----- From: Lefkovics, William [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 4:02 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exch5.5 and Linux firewall It would be incorrectly simplified either way. Part of the process would be to utilise a more secure OS (by default) than ANY flavour/version/twist of Linux. For me, that would fall on the only OS I know to maintain the mandate of secure by default, OpenBSD. I certainly wouldn't want to keep a production Exchange server behind a Windows-based 'firewall' product. -----Original Message----- From: Benjamin Scott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2001 5:42 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Exch5.5 and Linux firewall On Tue, 30 Oct 2001, Lefkovics, William wrote: >> your Linux Firewall > > or if you'd prefer, a firewall on a secure OS. "Security is a process, not a product." -- Ben Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not | | necessarily represent the views or policy of any other person, entity or | | organization. All information is provided without warranty of any kind. | List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm List Charter and FAQ at: http://www.sunbelt-software.com/exchange_list_charter.htm
