From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1HmYhg-0007Ah-2C for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 11 May 2007 17:14:52 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with SMTP id l4BHDbUv011998; Fri, 11 May 2007 17:13:37 GMT Received: from smtp.tele2bedrift.no (smtp.tele2bedrift.no [193.216.69.194]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with ESMTP id l4BH91Xu007048 for ; Fri, 11 May 2007 17:09:01 GMT Received: (qmail 4018 invoked from network); 11 May 2007 17:06:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO alstadheim.priv.no) (193.216.50.238) by smtp.tele2bedrift.no with SMTP; 11 May 2007 17:06:48 -0000 X-Finnesikke-B-A-I-T: finnesikke@alstadheim.priv.no Received: from [192.168.2.89] (armada.alstadheim.priv.no [192.168.2.89]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by alstadheim.priv.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A87451D68 for ; Fri, 11 May 2007 19:09:01 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <4644A32C.7060104@alstadheim.priv.no> Date: Fri, 11 May 2007 19:09:00 +0200 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?H=E5kon_Alstadheim?= User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.10 (X11/20060911) 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 To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] {OT} web/mail server as nameserver References: <49bf44f10705101329l2b0a207cif8c2399ed99623ea@mail.gmail.com> <200705111428.46547.crayon.shin.chan.uk@gmail.com> <20070511104800.8660@gmx.net> <200705112107.59206.crayon.shin.chan.uk@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <200705112107.59206.crayon.shin.chan.uk@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by robin.gentoo.org id l4BHDbVD011998 X-Archives-Salt: 74cb9d19-4c2a-4657-9d79-d7459828c0ba X-Archives-Hash: 9992c5354beed7d3af1f3cf71faed75b Crayon Shin Chan wrote: > On Friday 11 May 2007 18:48, jarry@gmx.net wrote: > > =20 >> Poor security of bind is imho similar superstition as it is >> for sendmail: once in the past this software had some problem, >> so now a lot of people think they should forever avoid using it... >> =20 > > If the OP doesn't need any bind-specific feature then why not use djbdn= s=20 > which has a better security track record. djb software are built from t= he=20 > ground up to be secure (as is possible), he also splits the "program"=20 > into smaller executables, each having a specific job thus making each o= f=20 > them secure a simpler task. Whilst bind and sendmail have made=20 > substantial efforts to be more secure, they are still built on legacy a= nd=20 > bloated monolithic code. > > =20 Just to fill in the picture a bit, the djb* software also has a long "flip-the-bird-at-any-rfc-you-don't-like" track-record. --=20 H=E5kon Alstadheim=20 spamtrap: finnesikke@alstadheim.priv.no -- 1 hit & you are out --=20 gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list