On Wed, Jan 09, 2008 at 05:07:35PM -0600, Jacob Yocom-Piatt wrote: > Marc Balmer wrote: > >Nikns Siankin wrote: > > > >>Facts about OpenBSD: > >> > >># Stable release cycle. If you want to run latest bugfree ClamAV or > >>FireFox - upgrade to CURRENT! But don't forget to buy release CD's!!! > >># Secure By Default. > >> OpenBSD uses broken WEP for securing WiFi networks. > >> Has no WPA/WPA2 support. > >># Do not let serious problems sit unsolved. OpenBSD doesn't need > >>MAC because it has their own security flawed systrace. > >># Use of Cryptography. OpenBSD uses file-backed encryption (svnd) > >>which is very suited > >> for Full-disk-encryption. NOT. > >># Full Disclosure. OpenBSD at first denies remote exploitable > >>flaws. DoS flaws gets marked as reliability not security issues. > >># Easy maintainable. OpenBSD distributes source patches to make > >>your farm of > >> Pentium2 firewalls updated easly. > >># Secure Distribution. > >> The most secure operation system gets distributed on FTP servers > >> as unsigned binaries. > > > Facts about Nikns Siankin: > > # Whiner. He bitches incessantly about stuff and does nothing to fix > it. AFAICT he's even saying that purchasing the CDs is pointless. > # Jerk. He ignores that most of the development time that goes into > OpenBSD is DONATED by highly-skilled individuals. You can only add as > many bells and whistles as you have resources and time. > # Misleading. He claims the system is distributed on FTP servers and > elects not to note that code is available via cvs over ssh. > # Ignorant. OpenBSD has myriad additional security technologies in it > that help to moderate vulnerabilities in poorly coded applications like > firefox and clamav. > # Idiot. By whining in a totally counterproductive fashion he alienates > himself from those who would otherwise, provided his requests were > reasonable, help him out.
I'd add some points: # Possibly frustrated because quite a few diffs never made it into ports. I guess due to lack of time or interest of the devs # Helpful with testing ports and get bugs fixed there Thanks Nikns, for your help so far. I don't feel great about the situation with -stable ports. But as I only run 2 OpenBSD boxes at the moment, I usually stick to -current anyway. And as I don't have time nor machines to contribute/test -stable ports I think I don't should complain about the -stable situation. What is a bit unclear to me: are some developers willing to commit security patches for -stable ports if # posts of security patches for -stable ports are welcome on @ports? # someone put them together? # they get enough testing? Apart from this, I haven't seen any posts of security patches (not updates) for -stable on @ports during last months. At least I can't remember any. Regards, Markus
