On Mon 2008-06-23 18:48, Arvid Ephraim Picciani wrote: > On Monday 23 June 2008 16:59:30 Aaron Griffin wrote: > > I agree with Simo and Jan here. While we could easily take the "do it > > yourself" road, I always preferred the "sane defaults" side of Arch, > > myself. That is - install some crap and it works out-of-the-box in a > > pretty decent manner. It's a very small stretch from "sane defaults" > > to "secure defaults". Unless you think sane != secure. > > so this is the official announcment that the vanilla-style-do-it-yourself for > professional engineers and manual readers is no more, and that in future > there will be rather debian-style-out-of-the-box solutions for those who > want it to "just work" ? > I'm fine with that new way. I'm going to look for a different distro then > instead of having to unpatch more and more packages. I just would like to > have a clear signal finally. The back and forth between those different > styles is really painfull for somone who has to actually maintain a few > dozens of machines. > I guess you can run your systems easy and secure with the debian style, but > you have to have a different kind of personality then me. > thanks I don't want to talk about the "philosophy" of the distro, but I'd like to know what's the security issue in having a dedicated user/group for web servers. -- Alessio (molok) Bolognino Please send personal email to themolok@xxxxxxxxx Public Key http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xFE0270FB GPG Key ID = 1024D / FE0270FB 2007-04-11 Key Fingerprint = 9AF8 9011 F271 450D 59CF 2D7D 96C9 8F2A FE02 70FB
Attachment:
pgpobyzcz_FhJ.pgp
Description: PGP signature
