Re: Secure Servers (SMTP, POP3, FTP)

From: Chris Faulhaber (jedgar@fxp.org)
Date: 02/11/01 

Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2001 07:42:01 -0500
From: Chris Faulhaber <jedgar@fxp.org>
To: Dominic Marks <dominic_marks@hotmail.com>

On Sun, Feb 11, 2001 at 11:39:01AM -0000, Dominic Marks wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'd really appreciate some opinions on the performance of some daemons. I'm
> trying to assess which is the best choice to offer both security and
> performance under FreeBSD 4.2. Apache seems like a pretty defacto choice for
> HTTP which I'm very happy with but I'm a little less sure what choose on
> others, in particular for ftp and mail servers.
>

Well, the following seems a bit backwards:

> FTP Options:
> 1. proFTPd - Seems secure and has "enterprise" features

Not sure...

> 2. wu-Ftpd - Good security (bad History) excellent performance

I doubt that it is now in the 'good security' category with numerous
remote root holes per year (and I am sure more to come).

> 3. ftpd - Dodgy security? Doesn't seem to be used very much

Not sure where you get 'dodgy security' from. Our ftpd hasn't been
vulnerable in quite a while (including not being vulnerable to the hole
OpenBSD's ftpd was last year).

The big question is: what features do you need? If the base ftpd has
the features you require, why install something else with a poor
history?

>
> Mail Options:
> 1. Qmail - Secure, written for FreeBSD (Qwest?), Fast, Configurable

But the code is unauditable and the license stinks.

> 2. Sendmail - Industry standard, works fine, big user base
> 3. Postfix - Secure, quite light on system resources, growing support

Along with easy to configure

> I'd appreciate some feedback on any of these, any comments you might have
> would be very helpful, or perhaps links to articles on this subject.
> 

-- 
Chris D. Faulhaber - jedgar@fxp.org - jedgar@FreeBSD.org
--------------------------------------------------------
FreeBSD: The Power To Serve   -   http://www.FreeBSD.org

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message

Relevant Pages

  • Re[2]: FreeBSD and i386 VM hardware
    ... the Intel microprocessors provide some very elaborate features ... MD>:for management of virtual memory, I/O operations, and security, allowing total ... How much of this is used by FreeBSD? ... MD> use most of the major MMU/VM features of the processor. ...
    (FreeBSD-Security)
  • Re: Anthonys drive issues.Re: ssh password delay
    ... They do a much better job than the FreeBSD project does, ... Not Windows NT and its successors. ... Many features of OS X seem oddly to match many of the features ... Current Windows systems have a much stronger security model than UNIX; ...
    (freebsd-questions)
  • RE: PAWS security vulnerability
    ... FreeBSD security list" isn't grammatically correct. ... "I told you to post the patch and info to the appropriate FreeBSD security ... "...This point and others are often discussed on the mailing lists, ...
    (freebsd-questions)
  • Changes to FreeBSD security support policy
    ... for tracking security fixes to FreeBSD 4.3-RELEASE: ... This eliminates support for the class of vulnerabilities exploitable ...
    (FreeBSD-Security)
  • RE: FreeBSD Security Survey
    ... Your also ignoring the fact that many security holes are a lot ... queries to this server to the NAS only. ... server with a new version of FreeBSD. ... Your survey responses lack any responses that indicate that leaving ...
    (freebsd-questions)
Quantcast