OSEC

Neohapsis is currently accepting applications for employment. For more information, please visit our website www.neohapsis.com or email hr@neohapsis.com
 
From: KuroiNeko (evpopkovCARRIER.KIEV.UA)
Date: Fri Feb 02 2001 - 13:33:02 CST

  • Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

     Hi all,

     Do we really need to be worried that much about ISC's decision to create a
    fee-based membership forum? I think that the major problem is with the
    wording Paul Vixie's `pre-announcement.' The line below is somewhat
    ambiguous to me:

    > 2. Vendors who include BIND in their products

     Is a person who installs and configures a server running BIND assumed to
    be a vendor? After all, the server I've built is a product. To provide an
    analogy, if you build a Linux-based server totally from the most recent
    sources, can this be treated as your own distro? You just don't burn it,
    and there's only a single instance of it, but it's still something you've
    designed and implemented. And charged your customer for.
     Lists of requirements and features also need some clarifications IMHO, and
    I believe they'll be reviewed soon.
     In general, ISC needs some funds and it offers a paid service. If you can
    discover a bug and patch it, good. If you can't and you can pay and be
    informed on recent ISC's achievements in BIND security in advance. And this
    only takes exploits found and patched by ISC themselves. That's how I read
    it, correct me if I'm wrong. Numerous BugTraq posters will still be able to
    share BIND security information they have and I haven't found anything in
    Paul Vixie's message that tells ISC will not allow them to. Unless they are
    members of the forum, but that's another story.
     So, good guys want to make some money and honestly warn us about it, so
    there's no reason to yell at them :) I could call this `much ado about
    nothing,' but there's one point not (yet) brought to public attention. I
    don't want no allusions to the latest events with a well-known company from
    Redmond, but it seems like having only one product that provides such a
    crucial service is far from perfect.
     Yes, SMTP and DNS. sendmail and bind. The most used, the most blessed, the
    most cursed. Worse admin's nightmares, crunching gazillions of bytes every
    hour all around the world. Yes, Apache too. They all have their weak and
    strong points, but that's not what I'm talking about.
     I stand on positions of elitism, I like it when someone or something is
    number one. I'm just slightly nervous when something is the only one. The
    reasons are numerous and I'm sure that honourable BugTraq subscribers all
    know them well.
     Again, control over three major 'Net services, SMTP, DNS and HTTP is being
    concentrated. The teams are doing excellent work, but what's waiting for
    them and for all of us at the end of the road?

    --
    

    ÌĤ¯Ç­¤ÏÁͤòÊá¤é¤Ì