As far as I have understood openbsd it isn't designed entirely to be a
desktop os.  It's built to be secure.  They have put in a great deal of
work into pf.  The only thing that I have used it for is firewalls and
some other services.  I don't see it the same as if linux were to run
around and say that.  Also the reason OpenBSD claims it is that they
started the entire project based on that single idea.  (Might not have
been only reason, but hugh non the less).  In my opinion it's it two
different beasts.

NOT SAYING ANYTHING BAD about linux. (just want to make that clear.  I
use it on all of my servers and desktops except for my firewalls

http://openbsd.org/goals.html
Pay attention to security problems and fix them before anyone else does.
(Try to be the #1 most secure operating system).

  * Greater integration of cryptographic software. This means IPsec, key
    engines, Kerberos, free-AFS, and other forms of strong crypto or
    crypto-using systems. OpenBSD is developed and released from Canada
    and due to Canadian law it is legal to export crypto to the world.
    (As researched by a Canadian individual and as documented in the
    Export Control list of Canada). OpenBSD developers are doing active
    research and development on IPsec.


how about those for goals
I don't think there is anything on the list of goals about desktops or
usable for the masses.


Stephen

PS  I don't understand what you are getting at.




On Sat, 2005-05-21 at 09:05 -0600, Kenneth Burgener wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > i'm not completely certain i understand your point here, but it would be
> > cool if other operating systems were that secure in the default
> > installation.  i think that windows in particular ought to be very
> > secure in the default installation because it is focused toward the
> > people who would find it quite difficult to set up something more secure
> > than the default installation.  
> 
> 
> Security is a two sided sword.  Generally the more secure you make 
> something, the harder it is for your users to do work.  Usually this 
> problem is helped by educating users, but once again the problem goes 
> back to the point you made that these users are usually the people who 
> aren't that computer literate.  Although there is a fine balance, too 
> insecure and you give your users more freedom then they need or will 
> use, which is the problem that Windows faces.
> 
> Kenneth
> 
> 
> .===================================.
> | This has been a P.L.U.G. mailing. |
> |      Don't Fear the Penguin.      |
> |  IRC: #utah at irc.freenode.net   |
> `==================================='

.===================================.
| This has been a P.L.U.G. mailing. |
|      Don't Fear the Penguin.      |
|  IRC: #utah at irc.freenode.net   |
`==================================='

Reply via email to