pavement

Security (Why FreeBSD?)

From FreeBSDwiki
(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 1: Line 1:
FreeBSD has a significantly better security record, particularly as concerns out-of-the-box stability, than most if not all Linux distributions.  As an example, the default FreeBSD install includes OpenSSH set NOT to allow root logins - the hopeful remote user must log into SSH as a user in the wheel group, and must then [[su]] to root afterwards.  Most if not all Linux distros instead default OpenSSH to allow root login, which is hideously insecure because it allows a cracker to use a program like John the Ripper to try dictionary or brute-force attacks against the root account directly.
+
FreeBSD has a significantly better security record, particularly as concerns out-of-the-box security, than most if not all Linux distributions.  As an example, the default FreeBSD install includes OpenSSH set NOT to allow root logins - the hopeful remote user must log into SSH as a user in the wheel group, and must then [[su]] to root afterwards.  Most if not all Linux distros instead default OpenSSH to allow root login, which is hideously insecure because it allows a cracker to use a program like John the Ripper to try dictionary or brute-force attacks against the root account directly.
  
 
[[Category:Why FreeBSD?]]
 
[[Category:Why FreeBSD?]]

Revision as of 11:54, 6 September 2004

FreeBSD has a significantly better security record, particularly as concerns out-of-the-box security, than most if not all Linux distributions. As an example, the default FreeBSD install includes OpenSSH set NOT to allow root logins - the hopeful remote user must log into SSH as a user in the wheel group, and must then su to root afterwards. Most if not all Linux distros instead default OpenSSH to allow root login, which is hideously insecure because it allows a cracker to use a program like John the Ripper to try dictionary or brute-force attacks against the root account directly.

Personal tools