Re: Linux Distribution Recomendation

[Alvin Oga <alvin.sec () Virtual Linux-Consulting com>]

hi ya peter

okay .. i'll jump.. :-)

On Thu, 4 Mar 2004, Peter Busser wrote:

> Hi!
>
> > I like Slackware myself ( http://www.slackware.com/ ).  It is as close to pure
> > Linux as you can get.  It's getting easier to manage also.  As far as security
> > goes, that depends largely on the admin but, Slackware requires far fewer
> > patches and upgrades than more well known varients because they don't rewrite
> > everything before releasing it.
>
> Security does not depend on the admin alone.

yup

> The system can never be more
> secure than the level of security that the underlying software is able to
> provide.

no... that should be "never more secure than the weakest link" ...
        - the admin or the user ( 80% - 90% of the time )
        - the managers 
        - the corp computer usage policy or home computer usage policy
        - the patched server or unpatched due to laziness or not knowing
        - allowing anybody to connect w/ dhcp running
        - allowing anybody to connect w/ wireless running
        - allowing anybody to connect w/ telnet/ftp/pop3 ( cleartext pwd )
        - allowing insecure home network to connect(vpn) to the office
        - not having backups of *-your-* data
        - thinking that the firewall will sovle your problems 
                ( worst possible solution )
        - on and on and on

> The security of a normal Linux or UNIX system is rather poor.

but still more secure and better than the other os that 90% of the
non-techies use

> The security of a piece of software does not end with the implementation of
> security features in this piece of software. Most software requires
> configuration. And that goes for Slackware too. My experience with Slackware
> has taught me that Slackware is particularly weak in this area. It needs a 
> lot of handwork. Since handwork is done by humans, and humans tend to err now
> and then, it will eventually result in a higher number of configuration
> mistakes.

yes .. people make mistakes

slackware has no more extra tweeks to its os than other distro that is
tweeked to the hill for its "flavor"
        - redhat being the most tweeked and most hacked and probably due
        to most usage/penetration

        - one should normalize the number of successful hacks 
        vs the number of installations for a real answer of which is
        less susceptible to hacks

all distro uses the same sw
        - same kernel or tweekd ( broken )
        - same gcc/glibc
        - same bash
        - same sendmail
        - same dns
        - same apache
        - same ipchains/iptables
        - same mysql ....
        - same blah-blah ..

        ---> one distro is NOT more secure than another 

                -- it solely depends on the user's ability to know
                how to make it equally or better secure than the other


and i'd still pick slackware ... if its my choice

 
> The vision behind Adamantix is to improve the overall security features of

sounds like what nsa linux and trustix used to claim ?? along with the
other secure linux ??

c ya
alvin


---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ethical Hacking at the InfoSec Institute. Mention this ad and get $545 off 
any course! All of our class sizes are guaranteed to be 10 students or less 
to facilitate one-on-one interaction with one of our expert instructors. 
Attend a course taught by an expert instructor with years of in-the-field 
pen testing experience in our state of the art hacking lab. Master the skills 
of an Ethical Hacker to better assess the security of your organization. 
Visit us at: 
http://www.infosecinstitute.com/courses/ethical_hacking_training.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------------