There is an alternative to this insanity. It's called djbdns, and it is proven secure, and proven reliable. I've been using it in production for a year now, and performance has been flawless. Thousands of other administrators will offer the same assessment. BIND is a security mess - that's an empirical fact that can't be denied by anyone who has been on the net any appreciable amount of time. Why worry about timelines for advisories or patches or updates concerning this core service of the internet? Far easier to use software that has been proven to be secure and reliable from concept to execution (pun intended). http://cr.yp.to/djbdns.html MODERATORS: considering the 100% 'meta' quality of the post i'm replying to, i certainly hope that you'll post this 'advisory'. People need to be aware that there are alternatives to BIND. It's a disservice to the community to *not* allow through a pointer to software that could save tens of thousands of administrators this endlessly repeating headache of systems being vulnerable to exploit via one of the single most crucial parts of th internet infrastructure - DNS. all you need to do is look at the history of exploits for bind, and compare it to djbdns - even if you throw out all the years of data for BIND from before djbdns's release. At 06:41 AM 11/14/2002, Olaf Kirch wrote: >The whole thing was a mess. Timelines for the publication of _anything_, >from advisories to patches to updates, were either non-existing or >shifting all the time. Paul Theodoropoulos http://www.anastrophe.com http://folding.stanford.edu The Nicest Misanthrope on the Net
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon Nov 18 2002 - 02:27:08 PST