From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/35849 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Daniel Pittman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: Quimby Upgrade Date: 16 Apr 2001 22:11:05 +1000 Organization: Not today, thank you, Mother. Message-ID: <878zl111uu.fsf@inanna.rimspace.net> References: <20010410162812.7343.qmail@nightshade.la.mastaler.com> <87g0fg56fb.fsf@inanna.rimspace.net> <20010411052354.D46053@kens.com> <87g0fepwkn.fsf@inanna.rimspace.net> <87puehegxr.fsf@inanna.rimspace.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035171533 5272 80.91.224.250 (21 Oct 2002 03:38:53 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 03:38:53 +0000 (UTC) Keywords: bind,daniel,though,security,reports,apr Return-Path: Original-Received: (qmail 9834 invoked by alias); 16 Apr 2001 12:11:21 -0000 Original-Received: (qmail 9829 invoked from network); 16 Apr 2001 12:11:20 -0000 Original-Received: from melancholia.rimspace.net (HELO melancholia.danann.net) (203.36.211.210) by gnus.org with SMTP; 16 Apr 2001 12:11:20 -0000 Original-Received: from localhost (melancholia.danann.net [203.36.211.210]) by melancholia.danann.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 51ABB2A81C for ; Mon, 16 Apr 2001 22:11:08 +1000 (EST) Original-Received: by localhost (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 4B81E820EC; Mon, 16 Apr 2001 22:11:05 +1000 (EST) Original-To: ding@gnus.org In-Reply-To: =?iso-8859-1?q?("Bj=F8rn?= Mork"'s message of "13 Apr 2001 21:07:03 +0200") X-Homepage: http://danann.net/ X-spies: constitution smuggle FSF COSCO class struggle Noriega colonel NORAD ECHELON South Africa Ft. Knox terrorist Area 51 KGB North Korea User-Agent: Gnus/5.090001 (Oort Gnus v0.01) XEmacs/21.2 (Urania) Original-Lines: 64 Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:35849 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:35849 On 13 Apr 2001, Bj=F8rn Mork wrote: > Daniel Pittman writes: >> On 12 Apr 2001, Bj=F8rn Mork wrote: >> > Daniel Pittman writes: >> >> On Wed, 11 Apr 2001, Robin S. Socha wrote: >> >>=20 >> >> > At least OpenBSD ships with BIND 4. >> >>=20 >> >> Which has it's bonus points... and it's own suckages. Admittedly, >> >> though, it's not /nearly/ as bad as Bind 8 (on 9, given the number >> >> of bug reports I have seen so far). >>=20 >> Ahem. That should have been /or/ 9. :) >=20 > I kind of guessed that, hence my comment below :-) Fair enough. :) >> > You should probably get an appointment with an eye specialist. >>=20 >> Unless it's the typo which, admittedly, looks silly... Bind4 seems to >> have less day-to-day breakages than 8 or 9. It lacks *many* newer >> features, though, which some sites need. >>=20 >> I don't quite follow what you meant, though. >> Daniel >=20 > I just couldn't see why you included bind 9 in this. The way that I saw a half-dozen failed assertion reports from fairly standard use in a friendly network environment. Not my reports, not people I know well, so it /could/ be local breakage. Anyway, those bugs are undoubtedly fixed, but there will be plenty of bugs, security related and otherwise, left. > Bind 9 is a completely new DNS package which has only the name in > common with earlier bind versions. There hasn't been a single > security related bug in bind 9 yet, has there?=20 Not that I know of, although IIRC some of the reports were trivial DoS attacks. Define that as you will. [...] > Stating that bind 4 isn't nearly as bad as bind 9 just doesn't make > any sense at all. Bind 4 is as bad as bind 8, and that's *really* bad. >>From a reliability point of view, BIND 9 seems as flawed *today* as BIND 8 *in my eyes*. >>From a security point of view, it's almost certainly better. Reliable and skilled people have asserted so and, while I have not audited the code myself, I trust them. :) Security, though, is not the be-all and end-all of network servers. If it were, I would happily ditch BIND * it in favour of DJB-DNS. Daniel --=20 The young do not know enough to be prudent, and therefore they attempt the impossible, and achieve it, generation after generation. -- Pearl S. Buck