Bind in FreeBSD, security advisories

[Mark Andrews]

In message <9b0056db5b760c755dd4acc45bfbd1ad.authenticated at ultimatedns.net>, "C
hris H" writes:
> >
> > On 30.07.2013, at 19:49, Peter Maxwell <peter at allicient.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> >> I personally prefer qmail over sendmail
> >> but I wouldn't suggest qmail should be in base for the reason that sendmai
> l
> >> is the de facto standard on *nix shaped systems.
> >>
> >
> > One can argue that BIND is the de facto standard on *nix shaped systems too
> .
> 
> Considering the topic, and how many times it's come up. I'm not sure that's a
> nything to
> be proud of. ;)

Given not all CVE's are created equal and given the amount of
internal self consistancy checks (all of which kill the server if
they don't pass (and push the CVSS score to 7.x)) there are in BIND
the number of advisaries is actually very small.

Yes, this was a internal self consistancy check failing.

We are human and despite code reviews, unit and system tests, static
analysis checkers etc. some errors do make it through.

Mark

> > Daniel
> > _______________________________________________
> > freebsd-stable at freebsd.org mailing list
> > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
> > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-stable at freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
-- 
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742                 INTERNET: marka at isc.org