On Thu, 22 Feb 2001, Peter Cordes wrote:
> The most secure OS is the one you can do the best job securing.
> Some OSes make it easier to learn to secure them. The classic
> example is OpenBSD which is "secure by default", because it's
> default install is to not run any services.
But what's
On Thu, 22 Feb 2001, Peter Cordes wrote:
> The most secure OS is the one you can do the best job securing.
> Some OSes make it easier to learn to secure them. The classic
> example is OpenBSD which is "secure by default", because it's
> default install is to not run any services.
But what's
On Thu, Feb 22, 2001 at 11:06:41AM -0600, Michael Scott Shappe wrote:
> MacOS up through 9.x is arguably more secure *out of the box* for the same
> reason that Windows9x is secure *out of the box* -- there's no network
> listener running as a matter of course on such a system, and no provision
> w
On Thu, Feb 22, 2001 at 10:58:27AM -0500, Steve Rudd wrote:
> I have been told by a "Mac-head" that the Mac is the most secure server and
> that it is significantly more secure than any unix system, including Linux.
>
> Any comments
:-}
Try this:
# nmap -sU -p 1-65535 name.of.idiots.mac
And
On Thu, Feb 22, 2001 at 11:06:41AM -0600, Michael Scott Shappe wrote:
> MacOS up through 9.x is arguably more secure *out of the box* for the same
> reason that Windows9x is secure *out of the box* -- there's no network
> listener running as a matter of course on such a system, and no provision
>
On Thu, Feb 22, 2001 at 10:58:27AM -0500, Steve Rudd wrote:
> I have been told by a "Mac-head" that the Mac is the most secure server and
> that it is significantly more secure than any unix system, including Linux.
>
> Any comments
:-}
Try this:
# nmap -sU -p 1-65535 name.of.idiots.mac
An
On Thursday, February 22, 2001, 8:09:36 PM, andre wrote:
> I've used macs as servers for fairly large numbers of people working for a
> school district (k12 districts aren't into *nixes much yet, at least mine
> wasn't...). It ran webstar (httpd), eims (mail), quickdns pro, and
> netpresenz (ftpd).
On Thursday, February 22, 2001, 8:09:36 PM, andre wrote:
> I've used macs as servers for fairly large numbers of people working for a
> school district (k12 districts aren't into *nixes much yet, at least mine
> wasn't...). It ran webstar (httpd), eims (mail), quickdns pro, and
> netpresenz (ftpd)
On Thu, Feb 22, 2001 at 03:09:36PM -0900, Ethan Benson wrote:
> several years ago there was a silly `Crack a Mac' contest and someone
> managed to exploit a cgi script and deface the web site served by the
> Mac. in most cases such an attack would never allow site defacment on
> unix since the sit
On Thu, Feb 22, 2001 at 10:58:27AM -0500, Steve Rudd wrote:
> I have been told by a "Mac-head" that the Mac is the most secure server and
> that it is significantly more secure than any unix system, including Linux.
with MacOS everything runs as root since there is no security, no
UIDs, no permis
On Thu, Feb 22, 2001 at 03:09:36PM -0900, Ethan Benson wrote:
> several years ago there was a silly `Crack a Mac' contest and someone
> managed to exploit a cgi script and deface the web site served by the
> Mac. in most cases such an attack would never allow site defacment on
> unix since the si
On Thu, Feb 22, 2001 at 10:58:27AM -0500, Steve Rudd wrote:
> I have been told by a "Mac-head" that the Mac is the most secure server and
> that it is significantly more secure than any unix system, including Linux.
with MacOS everything runs as root since there is no security, no
UIDs, no permi
I've used macs as servers for fairly large numbers of people working for a
school district (k12 districts aren't into *nixes much yet, at least mine
wasn't...). It ran webstar (httpd), eims (mail), quickdns pro, and
netpresenz (ftpd). In my estimation, the security advantage definitely
goes to the
> I have been told by a "Mac-head" that the Mac is the most secure server and
> that it is significantly more secure than any unix system, including Linux.
MacOS up through 9.x is arguably more secure *out of the box* for the same
reason that Windows9x is secure *out of the box* -- there's no net
I've used macs as servers for fairly large numbers of people working for a
school district (k12 districts aren't into *nixes much yet, at least mine
wasn't...). It ran webstar (httpd), eims (mail), quickdns pro, and
netpresenz (ftpd). In my estimation, the security advantage definitely
goes to the
On Thu, 22 Feb 2001, Noah L. Meyerhans wrote:
> The thing is, any box on the network is going to be insecure, and the
I second(third?) that.
The best way to reduce the security risk to zero on ANY system is to:
1. Unplug ethernet
2. Unplug power cord
3. Lock system in co
On Thu, Feb 22, 2001 at 10:58:27AM -0500, Steve Rudd wrote:
> I have been told by a "Mac-head" that the Mac is the most secure server and
> that it is significantly more secure than any unix system, including Linux.
Believe it or not the U.S. military made such a claim about 18 months or
so back.
well, considering that mac has cornered .0001% of the network
operating system market, there may be some truth to that statement.
after all, the most secure os is one that no one uses, right?
some one else, replied stating that a systems level of security is
generally at the knowledge/ski
On Thu, Feb 22, 2001 at 10:58:27AM -0500, Steve Rudd wrote:
> I have been told by a "Mac-head" that the Mac is the most secure server and
> that it is significantly more secure than any unix system, including Linux.
>
> Any comments
It all depends on the admin. Given good tools to work with, t
Microsoft says the same about Windows 2000
Linux fans say the same about Linux
OpenBSD folks say the same about OpenBSD
...
Security relies on the good quality of the system and, more important, the
software you use but, in my opinion, is at the same level than the engineer in
charge of the sec
I have been told by a "Mac-head" that the Mac is the most secure server and
that it is significantly more secure than any unix system, including Linux.
Any comments
> I have been told by a "Mac-head" that the Mac is the most secure server and
> that it is significantly more secure than any unix system, including Linux.
MacOS up through 9.x is arguably more secure *out of the box* for the same
reason that Windows9x is secure *out of the box* -- there's no ne
On Thu, 22 Feb 2001, Noah L. Meyerhans wrote:
> The thing is, any box on the network is going to be insecure, and the
I second(third?) that.
The best way to reduce the security risk to zero on ANY system is to:
1. Unplug ethernet
2. Unplug power cord
3. Lock system in c
On Thu, Feb 22, 2001 at 10:58:27AM -0500, Steve Rudd wrote:
> I have been told by a "Mac-head" that the Mac is the most secure server and
> that it is significantly more secure than any unix system, including Linux.
Believe it or not the U.S. military made such a claim about 18 months or
so back
well, considering that mac has cornered .0001% of the network
operating system market, there may be some truth to that statement.
after all, the most secure os is one that no one uses, right?
some one else, replied stating that a systems level of security is
generally at the knowledge/sk
On Thu, Feb 22, 2001 at 10:58:27AM -0500, Steve Rudd wrote:
> I have been told by a "Mac-head" that the Mac is the most secure server and
> that it is significantly more secure than any unix system, including Linux.
>
> Any comments
It all depends on the admin. Given good tools to work with,
Microsoft says the same about Windows 2000
Linux fans say the same about Linux
OpenBSD folks say the same about OpenBSD
...
Security relies on the good quality of the system and, more important, the
software you use but, in my opinion, is at the same level than the engineer in
charge of the se
I have been told by a "Mac-head" that the Mac is the most secure server and
that it is significantly more secure than any unix system, including Linux.
Any comments
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
28 matches
Mail list logo
