Debian vs Slackware - With one is the secure, stable and fast distro?
Garyura
that will be use for my server. So I really hope that I can get any opinion
from U all about the secure, stable and fast distro ( Debian vs Slackware)
TQ for any oppinion. :)
Simon
I find both to be quite stable and fast, possibly Slackware moreso.
Security will not differ between distributions, it will depend on the
software & versions in use and the ability of the administrator to
configure those services correctly & securely.
--
Simon <si...@no-dns-yet.org.uk> **** PGP: 099977D0
"We demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty."
- Douglas Adams
Daniel de Kok
You ask in a Slackware newsgroup for an unbaised opinion? ;) Of course
Slackware is better:p. Anyway, just try both and see which you like most.
With kind regards,
Daniel de Kok
--
Running Slackware 8.1.01!
Website: http://www.blowgish.org/
NedSlack: http://www.nedslack.org/
+Chiron+
Hash: SHA1
Didn't you just post something *very* similar to this earlier in the week?
Now, go away.
- --
+Chiron+ | Did you hear about the new German microwave
GnuPG Pub Key 848D1A2D -o) | oven? ... Seats 500.
Linux Kernel 2.4.19 /\\ |
Slackware 8.1 *w00t* _\_v |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQE9clqfe8wcrYSNGi0RAoejAKDsw8rzpvpUMhjKrJSAA4AJYj9oHACdFQx2
9nTqiS2feZJSrjf70oYreEs=
=lu0q
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Locke
> software & versions in use and the ability of the administrator to
> configure those services correctly & securely.
Actually, security is probably better in Debian, since it has those
auto-update features. If you run the debian auto-update regularly, you get
fixed for security holes with no extra work, while with slack, it is a much
bigger job to keep things up do date.
Keith Keller
Hash: SHA1
In article <un4skfm...@corp.supernews.com>, Locke wrote:
> Actually, security is probably better in Debian, since it has those
> auto-update features. If you run the debian auto-update regularly, you get
> fixed for security holes with no extra work, while with slack, it is a much
> bigger job to keep things up do date.
This is so amazingly wrong I just had to respond. It is not a big
job to keep Slackware secure at all, if you know what you're doing.
And if you don't know what you're doing, Debian's auto-update isn't
going to help you keep your box secure.
Just out of curiosity, do you have evidence that it's ''a much bigger
job'' to maintain the security of a Slackware box as opposed to a Debian
box?
- --keith
- --
kkeller...@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us
(try just my userid to email me)
public key: http://wombat.san-francisco.ca.us/kkeller/kkeller.asc
alt.os.linux.slackware FAQ: http://wombat.san-francisco.ca.us/perl/fom
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org
iEYEARECAAYFAj1yeF8ACgkQhVcNCxZ5ID/8lQCfTb/in2HcxQEUUNOWJq5kMPd5
KaMAnjIXNbHlnasNk/cYoUxn0zyCrVsq
=rbUZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Jeremy Gray
If you think auto-update is the path to good security, I would suggest
you need to learn more about security.
--
Jeremy A. Gray
jag...@uiuc.edu
"Remember the Pueblo." -- the Fourth Law of Marvin
Simon
Feel free to call me paranoid, but I wouldn't trust an automatic
update feature to keep my systems secure. Whilst it may keep your
software versions up-to-date (if it doesn't break anything), it can
not read Bugtraq, etc, mails for recommended config changes or look
for any ./configure (or equivalent) script options that could make
it more secure or personalise it for your system.
Also, when Pat releases an updated package, I can read the SlackBuild
or $package.build script, make any changes I want to and compile from
source if I had/wanted to change anything.
Peter A. Garbarino
question earlier last week.
Joost Kremers
> On Mon, 2 Sep 2002 01:56:52 +0800, Garyura wrote:
>> Hello U all guy out there. I am want to find a secure, stable, fast distro
>> that will be use for my server. So I really hope that I can get any opinion
>> from U all about the secure, stable and fast distro ( Debian vs Slackware)
>> TQ for any oppinion. :)
>
> Didn't you just post something *very* similar to this earlier in the week?
yes:
<news://4ff7b3f6.02082...@posting.google.com>
---------------
From: gar...@yahoo.com (Garyura)
Newsgroups: alt.os.linux.slackware
Subject: Slackware vs Debian in term Stable, Secure and Fast Distro?
Date: 30 Aug 2002 00:02:29 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com/
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <4ff7b3f6.02082...@posting.google.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 203.121.0.10
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1030690949 29211 127.0.0.1 (30 Aug 2002
07:02:29 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups...@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: 30 Aug 2002 07:02:29 GMT
I have just read a lot of review that said booth this distro is very
Stable, Secure and fast. So now I want U all guy out there an opinion
about which one is really Stable, Secure & fast & why U said that.
TQ for any opinion.
(o_ <<<Garyura>>>
//\ (^_^)
V_/_
Linux LPI,CCNA,MCSE
--------------
my my, +Chiron+, that troll trap of yours must be working...
--
Joost Kremers http://baserv.uci.kun.nl/~jkremers
Ask 8 slackers how to do something, get 10 answers.
-- sl in alt.os.linux.slackware
Garyura
Slackware as my default distro for my next server setup
:)
"Daniel de Kok" <dan...@non.existant> wrote in message
news:3d726c8c$0$87556$8fcf...@news.wanadoo.nl...
James Stafford
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> In article <un4skfm...@corp.supernews.com>, Locke wrote:
> > Actually, security is probably better in Debian, since it has those
> > auto-update features. If you run the debian auto-update regularly, you get
> > fixed for security holes with no extra work, while with slack, it is a much
> > bigger job to keep things up do date.
>
> This is so amazingly wrong I just had to respond. It is not a big
> job to keep Slackware secure at all, if you know what you're doing.
> And if you don't know what you're doing, Debian's auto-update isn't
> going to help you keep your box secure.
>
> Just out of curiosity, do you have evidence that it's ''a much bigger
> job'' to maintain the security of a Slackware box as opposed to a Debian
> box?
>
machine had been hacked. He said that he had a dial up account. Some
people were surprised to hear that a dial up account would be hacked. By
looking at my proftp.log I see all kinds of people trying to sneak in.,
and I have a dial up account. They use tricks like putting root in front
of their user name, and other tricks. But Slackware is setup to defend
against this right out of the box. Nobody has gotten in my machine. If
you don't need or use some of the inet services just turn them off.
Also, the NSA (National Security Agency) has a couple of programs that
hardens Linux up a little more. While most of the programs are geared
towards RedHat, I do believe that they have the source available on
their web site. If you can get the news group comp.os.linux.announce
(the quickest way to find out is to type this name into your favorite
search engine, and then clicking on this name when it finds it. This
will automatically subscribe you to this news group if you ISP supplies
it.) The NSA just had an announcement the other day.
--
jamess
Slackware Linux... The choice of professionals.
Karl and Tanya Pizzolatto
a porno and this ain't a binary group.
;)
Karl and Tanya Pizzolatto
Done