On Mon, 6 Jul 1998, Allanah Myles wrote: > > These vulnerabilities are present in Sun Microsystem's > > Solaris 2.2, 2.3, 2.4 and 2.5.1. > > They fail to mention 2.6 - is this because this announcement was > pre-2.6, or is it fixed in 2.6? > At the time, I myself didn't have access to a Solaris 2.6. I had verified them a on Solaris 2.5.1, and later Mark had verified them on the other versions. Now I recall hearing that Solaris 2.6 was vulnerable, but I haven't confirmed that, so don't quote me on it. I'll check. Also, Sun has been nice enough to provide us with a Solaris 2.7 to do some testing. > This is another perfect example of why Sun should go back into the > hardware design and architecture business, and get OUT of the > OS/software business. Leave software design to real software > designers. > Speaking for myself here, I like Sun. I like [most] of their employees. For the record, I think it's unfair to judge a company's entire ability off one field. Your opinion is biased on security. I must say that I think several things are overlooked when it comes to Sun. Example: If a company is great with security, but terrible with portability, reliability, technical support... does that make them better than a company that is good overall, but lousy in a few fields? I don't think so. ***************************************************************************** Matt Conover <mattat_private> RSI R&D Team ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- RepSec, Inc. (RSI) [http://www.repsec.com] w00w00 Security Development (WSD) [http://www.w00w00.org] *****************************************************************************
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Apr 13 2001 - 14:02:35 PDT