portsnap, only for ports?
Hello. I have some questions about portsnap. The intention of portsnap seems to be reasonable. But I miss a similar facility updating the operating system! One of the major arguments using portsnap is to avoid the intrusion of malicous code, injected via a 'man in the middle'. Thinking of so called root-kits it makes more sense to me securing the updates of source code of the operating system also or at first place. Are there any plans doing so? Or alternatives? I still use CVS updating the source code. Oliver ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: portsnap, only for ports?
On Fri, Aug 19, 2005 at 12:46:37PM +0200, O. Hartmann wrote: Hello. I have some questions about portsnap. The intention of portsnap seems to be reasonable. But I miss a similar facility updating the operating system! One of the major arguments using portsnap is to avoid the intrusion of malicous code, injected via a 'man in the middle'. Thinking of so called root-kits it makes more sense to me securing the updates of source code of the operating system also or at first place. Are there any plans doing so? Or alternatives? I still use CVS updating the source code. Stick to releases, which have signed MD5 checksums that you can verify prior to installing. Kris pgp8Lt7DX2O6B.pgp Description: PGP signature
