>>60
You are welcome to take a look:
svn+ssh://svn.freebsd.org/base/head
ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/
>>61
http://pittsburgh.cbslocal.com/2012/07/06/fbi-issues-dns-changer-malware-warning/
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2403364,00.asp
http://techland.time.com/2012/04/23/dnschanger-fbi-warns-infected-computers-will-lose-web-email-access-in-july/
http://www.searchenginejournal.com/dnschanger-malware-fbi-warning/45780/
https://forms.fbi.gov/check-to-see-if-your-computer-is-using-rogue-DNS
>>64
Sir, I have not only read the source code, I tested on multiple standards I am required to do as my job, and still have not found one on a vanilla installation of FreeBSD. And I am not talking about the obvious holes that are on inetd and BIND (programs) on every OS, including the ones ported on Freebsd.
The drama on OpenBSD was from non-auditors, and the closest I can find, again are the obvious BIND security hole, esp. inetd.. You are welcome to make your own versions although, or use others than the default. We make our renditions of the defaults.
>>65
You are correct sir. We use chicken-scheme to type check our C code, and the binaries as well. We must compile back to C to maintain the source portable enough for multiple servers with different architectures. We also have a legacy standard we have to follow.
>>68
Small donations from and interested party does not mean the project/product has vulnerabilities. You have the freedom to review the code and audit it.