I BSD is more secure them linux?

maginotjr · 07-25-2005, 12:41 PM

I was just wondering, why is freeBSD (or othe variation, im not to familiar) more secure them linux, whats the big deal of both of them?

Those apps who run in linux run in BSD?? If BSD is better why linuxers dont use it, considering that they could run the same applications and the same window manager...

I´d never used freeBSD before, so I have a bounch of questions...

regards

Brian Knoblauch · 07-25-2005, 12:53 PM

BSD is not as user friendly, hence not used as much. More secure, probably. It's been around longer.

ultramancool · 07-25-2005, 12:58 PM

PCBSD is out to change that! http://www.pcbsd.org/

reddazz · 07-25-2005, 01:05 PM

Personally, I dont think BSD's are more secure than Linux. The problem is that some Linux distributors, release their distros with configurations that make them easy to attack whereas most BSD's are locked down by default.

primo · 07-25-2005, 07:33 PM

Linux and *BSD are entirely different worlds, and each has its pros and cons:

Many serious vulnerabilities have been found in the Linux kernels, and it is not because it's used more than *BSD: it is because of the new features that are being added everytime, and bugs are inevitable.

There are 2 Linux distributions that are actively auditing the kernel and software... They are Debian and Gentoo (they release advisories everytime, contributing, yet they are more secure than FedoraCore/Mandrake/etc...)

*BSD's seems to me more stable because they have evolved with a path that isn't as reckless as the Linux one, but the approach used by OpenBSD doesn't still convince me, because the trade-off between security and usability isn't ok. Also, a lot of testing is done by the users, not just by a tight group of developers.

I'm happy with all these open-source Unix choices anyway. It is not about one vs another.
I think everyone who doesn't need to take one side has the potential to take the best of each

rehab junkie · 07-25-2005, 08:11 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by maginotjr
I was just wondering, why is freeBSD (or othe variation, im not to familiar) more secure them linux, whats the big deal of both of them?

Neither. A system is only as secure as its administrator.

Brian Knoblauch · 07-26-2005, 07:19 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by primo
but the approach used by OpenBSD doesn't still convince me, because the trade-off between security and usability isn't ok.

Well, it *is* for ISP's that need to have machines pretty much standing wide open to attack on the Internet... For the rest of us, no, the security over usability greatly decreases the usefulness of OpenBSD.

linuxpyro · 07-26-2005, 12:40 PM

I agree with rehab junkie.

You mentioned Linux software running on the BSDs. This is not true for all apps; I do 3D modeling and animation using Maya , for which there is a Linux version. Being complex software, it relies on Linux too much to run on *BSD. Same with Shake.

meandrain · 08-04-2005, 04:23 PM

I love BSD, that's for sure.

FreeBSD is more secure than linux because in default installation it does not have many services activated, so it is harder to hack.

Some linux distros have many options activated so are more vulnerable.

That is from the newbie point of view.

A secure server, FreeBSD, Linux or a commercial unix is... secure... if is configured to be secure.

that means:
-deactivate every service you do not need
-keep up to date with patches for your runing services/programs, to fix security bugs

A well configured BOX will be secure, it does not matter if it is FreeBSD or Linux.