![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Ditching my Wireless G! What's your take?
- Thread starter Operaghost
- Start date
This statement has no facts to back it up, nor does it make any valid sense what-so-ever.
Work on your reading comprehension and realize that less is sometimes more.
For example..
https://www.cvedetails.com/vulnerability-list/vendor_id-11749/product_id-21763/Pfsense-Pfsense.html
IdiotInCharge
NVIDIA SHILL
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2003
- Messages
- 14,675
That looks like pretty good performance?
Especially given that pfSense is essentially a *nix distro that's gluing packages together?
You missed thepoint
IdiotInCharge
NVIDIA SHILL
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2003
- Messages
- 14,675
So maybe you should refine it?
Actually, IdiotInCharge's reading comprehension skills must be better than your own.
You apparently have never done any security work. Literally everything has vulnerabilities. That is why we harden them.
_________________________________________________________
Look! I can do that too!!!
Cisco: https://www.cvedetails.com/product-list/vendor_id-16/Cisco.html
Palo Alto: https://www.cvedetails.com/vendor/12836/Paloaltonetworks.html
Juniper: https://www.cvedetails.com/vulnerability-list/vendor_id-874/year-2018/Juniper.html
Fortinet: https://www.cvedetails.com/vulnerability-list/vendor_id-3080/Fortinet.html
_________________________________________________________
The only 'relevant' vulnerability listed is for pfsense 2.4.1, which was fixed in 2.4.2. We are now on 2.4.3. No known vulnerabilities listed....you were saying?
If you received the MS-ISAC vulnerability newsletter, you would be bombarded with an update at least once every other week about some Cisco vulnerability that needs to be patched ASAP (either that or Adobe, or Office).
EDIT: Good, now we can start making actual real suggestions to the OP.
Last edited: