Secure Linux Distro

[Bill Warner]

I would say it has more to do with the pholosiphy of how
the distros are created.  while redhat/mandrake/others are
designed for cutting edge desktop with latest greatest.  Debian
is more based on proven slightly less cutting edge software.
They also have a test cycle that seems to be more thorough
then other distros.

Debian to me is Linux true to hart designed around the community
the way the kernel is.

Bill Warner

Tim Weaver wrote:

> As a newbie, why would Debian be better than RH (and derivative) distros re:
> security?
>
>  -----Original Message-----
> From:   Bill Warner [mailto:wwarner@direct-alliance.com]
> Sent:   Wednesday, July 05, 2000 9:56 AM
> To:     plug-discuss@lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us
> Subject:        Re: Secure Linux Distro
>
> All that being said Jean is a security expert and knows what to look for.
> If
> you would like a good starting point for good security OpenBSD is a good
> start.  If you must have/want Linux then Debian would be my next suggestion.
> So
> if your not a security expert like Mr. Francois is, you would probably want
> to use one of the above as a better starting point than Mandrake or RedHat.
>
> Just my $0.02
> Bill Warner
>
> "J.L.Francois" wrote:
>
> > It seems like on Tue, Jul 04, 2000 at 04:15:15PM -0700, The Wolf
> scribbled:
> > Orig Msg> I have been using Mandrake for quite some time.
> > Orig Msg>
> > Orig Msg> But since they have been pronounced the easiest
> > Orig Msg> distro to break into I would like to know what
> > Orig Msg> would be the hardest dirstro to break in.
> > Orig Msg>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Plug-discuss mailing list  -  Plug-discuss@lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us
> http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss