bind chrooted, logging and SELinux = suffering
fv+abuse at nospam.usen.epitools.com
Thu Jun 2 16:32:36 UTC 2005
Jason Vas Dias <jvdias at redhat.com> wrote in
news:d7n7d1$16ol$1 at sf1.isc.org:
>> >On Wed, 2005-06-01 at 12:17, Pete Ehlke wrote:
>> >> On Wed Jun 01, 2005 at 11:46:16 -0400, Jason Vas Dias wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >By default, Red Hat ships BIND with maximum security
>> >> >protection enabled, to counter known security
>> >> >vulnerabilities as mandated by our security response team.
>> >> >
>> >> You know, the 'known security vulnerabilities' chestnut just
>> >> keeps popping up. Please tell me- what 'known security
>> >> vulnerabilities' have you identified in current versions of
>> >> BIND?
> No problem - you did ask for the reasons for our BIND SELinux
No, he didn't. Reread. He asked you to list the "known security
vulnerabilities" in BIND that you referred to.
| I tried to explain them to you.
But you didn't attempt to answer his question. You'd make a good
More information about the bind-users