3 ms·
Can't argue with that, although: > - FreeBSD Jails and Mac (These are extremely strong security features if implemented correctly. Especially jails are really
by hiphopyo 12y ago
Can't argue with that, although:
> - FreeBSD Jails and Mac (These are extremely strong security features if implemented correctly. Especially jails are really undervalued/misunderstood IMHO.)
Aren't these are only necessary if you let people you don't trust into your system?
> - PF version runs on multiple cpus (OpenBSD's version is more advanced though)
Personally I dislike running PF on FreeBSD as it requires me to resort to old docs and use old syntaxes.
> - Capsicum (security)
Isn't this being ported as we speak?
- paulfurtado 12y ago> Aren't these are only necessary if you let people you don't trust into your system? They also provide an additional layer of protection if you're running server software which gets exploited.
- Sanddancer 12y agoJails also have resource limits, so you can have a group of processes that are related, but not started from the same executable, be held to a certain amount of CPU, memory, etc usage. They're also useful in testing/debug situations; coupled with ZFS' copy on write features, they let you quickly create identical environments which can be real helpful in trouble isolation.
- kjs3 12y agoJails provide some protection to the base OS even if the network exposed service running in the jail is compromised. It for much more than local exploits.