From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1IRO1Z-0002g7-Ui for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sat, 01 Sep 2007 08:08:10 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with SMTP id l817x4uN011944; Sat, 1 Sep 2007 07:59:04 GMT Received: from mail.digimed.co.uk (82-69-83-178.dsl.in-addr.zen.co.uk [82.69.83.178]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with ESMTP id l817r8Fu004582 for ; Sat, 1 Sep 2007 07:53:09 GMT Received: from krikkit.digimed.co.uk (krikkit.digimed.co.uk [192.168.1.3]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.digimed.co.uk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 302081AB300 for ; Sat, 1 Sep 2007 08:53:08 +0100 (BST) Date: Sat, 1 Sep 2007 08:52:58 +0100 From: Neil Bothwick To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] [OT] Lets push our disttro "Gentoo" UP - Cast your vote! Message-ID: <20070901085258.3cd42200@krikkit.digimed.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <200709010843.16690.michaelkintzios@gmail.com> References: <1188622946.6951.10.camel@sysconcept.ca> <200709010843.16690.michaelkintzios@gmail.com> Organization: Digital Media Production X-Mailer: Claws Mail 2.10.0cvs186 (GTK+ 2.10.14; powerpc-unknown-linux-gnu) X-GPG-Fingerprint: 7260 0F33 97EC 2F1E 7667 FE37 BA6E 1A97 4375 1903 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary=Sig_XWgVjIkF6Ag1da4u1ty9IDD; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=PGP-SHA1 X-Archives-Salt: a76a4e3e-0fc3-4490-a211-2697aad2f2f5 X-Archives-Hash: 32796b047b48f76bee61a674c3f3bed4 --Sig_XWgVjIkF6Ag1da4u1ty9IDD Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello Mick, > Hmm, I'm not sure. The question is which *is* the most secure distro, > not which can be made the most secure. A vanilla Gentoo installation > (I know there is no such thing with Gentoo) has no firewall installed. > Any application can open any port to the wind and especially with a > poor security policy has the potential to expose the box to an attack. > More so than a binary distro Gentoo relies on an intelligent > configuration to be secure. On the other hand, a "vanilla" Gentoo installation could be considered a bare Stage 3, which has so little software installed it has to be the most secure. Which only goes to show how meaningless such polls are. --=20 Neil Bothwick "Bother" said Rue, as his paranoia spread across the publicly accessible archives --Sig_XWgVjIkF6Ag1da4u1ty9IDD Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFG2Rpjum4al0N1GQMRAmdGAJ0QYqvm9LXsJnRZmH/xLampTUlT6gCfReYy xsO7+uCw18ib8od67LVtAU8= =wjXs -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_XWgVjIkF6Ag1da4u1ty9IDD-- -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list