Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!
Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!
-
Congratulations Chris Miller on being selected by the Tek-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
linux
- Thread starter metrix007
- Start date
Hey, I don't mean to be a grinch, but you're cross-posting this question all over the place. Trust me, it doesn't increase the quality of your answers to do this, and it makes it harder to have a coherent discussion. -------------------
Current reading --
Current reading --
- Thread starter
- #3
"openbsd is supposed to be indestructable, why doesnt everyone run that? also i have been informed that bsd is more mature and stable/secure to linux and that linux code is sloppy, is this correct? are bsd's faster than slackware/debian/redhat?"
Nothing is indestructable other than GOD. Open has issues to as it is just an O.S. itself. Open has a better track record for security by DEFAULT than other bsd's. Opens code goes through more scrunity than others (free,net etc..) but this has changed. Open still has the most secure by default install, however netbsd or freebsd can be just as secure with a little attention after install. It only takes about an hr. to get services turned off, system tweaked and the kernel recompiled. I have always used open in the past but as of their current release 3.0 the IPF firewall has been removed and the open team has gone out of their way to make it very difficult to install after the fact. Even if you do get it installed , i am told that it just does not run well.
open is currently using their own fw, but it does not have the extensive capabilites or the maturity ipf did. Also i dont like being forced to use their S/W that is why i hate M.S.
My opinion is that freebsd is good for desktops,servers etc.... as it has more hardware support,more Software,faster filesystem and is easier to configure with an abundant amount of support. Netbsd would be my choice now for a fw. Both net and free still use the mature IPF fw code;,however in my opinion,Net makes better FW material and many would argue that net was and is more secure than open.
The file system in linux seems to be faster than BSD, well used to be as of the current 4.5 release of freebsd labs are showing that they are very close. Linux is not as stable as BSD so for a server under high load BSD does better than linux. Linux does have more commercial software but who wants commercial when the open community produces better products?
From a security standpoint linux is still maturing and ,in my opinion, does not make a wise choice. From a commercial, corporate, desktop view it is ok. You should get atleast one linux box to learn on as you will need the skill sometime. I would recommend Slackware. Slackware is harder to setup then redhat and its brothers but it was one of the first linux distro's to surface and has the maturity others lack. Slack is the securist linix i have found and the community is helpful seeing how most of its users are hackers of some kind which have more of an understanding for code.
Nothing is indestructable other than GOD. Open has issues to as it is just an O.S. itself. Open has a better track record for security by DEFAULT than other bsd's. Opens code goes through more scrunity than others (free,net etc..) but this has changed. Open still has the most secure by default install, however netbsd or freebsd can be just as secure with a little attention after install. It only takes about an hr. to get services turned off, system tweaked and the kernel recompiled. I have always used open in the past but as of their current release 3.0 the IPF firewall has been removed and the open team has gone out of their way to make it very difficult to install after the fact. Even if you do get it installed , i am told that it just does not run well.
open is currently using their own fw, but it does not have the extensive capabilites or the maturity ipf did. Also i dont like being forced to use their S/W that is why i hate M.S.
My opinion is that freebsd is good for desktops,servers etc.... as it has more hardware support,more Software,faster filesystem and is easier to configure with an abundant amount of support. Netbsd would be my choice now for a fw. Both net and free still use the mature IPF fw code;,however in my opinion,Net makes better FW material and many would argue that net was and is more secure than open.
The file system in linux seems to be faster than BSD, well used to be as of the current 4.5 release of freebsd labs are showing that they are very close. Linux is not as stable as BSD so for a server under high load BSD does better than linux. Linux does have more commercial software but who wants commercial when the open community produces better products?
From a security standpoint linux is still maturing and ,in my opinion, does not make a wise choice. From a commercial, corporate, desktop view it is ok. You should get atleast one linux box to learn on as you will need the skill sometime. I would recommend Slackware. Slackware is harder to setup then redhat and its brothers but it was one of the first linux distro's to surface and has the maturity others lack. Slack is the securist linix i have found and the community is helpful seeing how most of its users are hackers of some kind which have more of an understanding for code.- Status
Similar threads
