Windows to copy open bsd
Hey did you hear that in Windows vista they implemented ASLR , somethink similar to the technology of random memory allocation in open bsd. So I gues Windows is copying bsd. Cool.
Re: Windows to copy open bsd
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hey did you hear that in Windows vista they implemented ASLR , somethink similar to the technology of random memory allocation in open bsd. So I gues Windows is copying bsd. Cool. We'll see, like many other security features in Windows, if they implement it *properly*. DS
Re: Windows to copy open bsd
no way. trust me. ;) We'll see, like many other security features in Windows, if they implement it *properly*. DS
Re: Windows to copy open bsd
On Fri, 2006-06-02 at 12:58:43 -0700, akonsu wrote... no way. trust me. ;) Who the fuck are you to trust?
Re: Windows to copy open bsd
i am sorry you are on this list. konstantin 2006/6/2, Eric Pancer [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Fri, 2006-06-02 at 12:58:43 -0700, akonsu wrote... no way. trust me. ;) Who the fuck are you to trust?
Re: Windows to copy open bsd
in my understanding a proper implementation does not require any service packs. in other words: if one implements something that later requires a service pack, this is not a proper implementation. konstantin 2006/6/2, misiu [EMAIL PROTECTED]: akonsu schrieb: no way. trust me. ;) We'll see, like many other security features in Windows, if they implement it *properly*. DS You guys funny! But to remind all you, with Servicepack 2 for XP, it is unpossible to execute injected code... Or did I understand something wrong? m
Re: Windows to copy open bsd
-- Original message -- From: Eric Pancer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Who the fuck are you to trust? you're just a warm and fuzzy kind of guy, aren't you?
Re: Windows to copy open bsd
On Fri, 2006-06-02 at 20:48:06 +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote... you're just a warm and fuzzy kind of guy, aren't you? Only on friday's.
Re: Windows to copy open bsd
What's the point of any portion of this thread? The subject matter is complete hearsay, and so far, no one (including captain fucktrust) has had any relevant input. If you want to discuss windows, I'm sure there's a ton of mailing lists out there... Can't we all just get along ... and let this thread die a quiet death? danno -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Eric Pancer Sent: Friday, June 02, 2006 4:18 PM To: akonsu Cc: misc@openbsd.org Subject: Re: Windows to copy open bsd On Fri, 2006-06-02 at 12:58:43 -0700, akonsu wrote... no way. trust me. ;) Who the fuck are you to trust?
Re: Windows to copy open bsd
akonsu wrote: in my understanding a proper implementation does not require any service packs. in other words: if one implements something that later requires a service pack, this is not a proper implementation. Exactly. (And I don't seem to hear a lot about keeping OpenBSD patched up-to-date;) 2006/6/2, misiu [EMAIL PROTECTED]: akonsu schrieb: no way. trust me. ;) We'll see, like many other security features in Windows, if they implement it *properly*. Now, would you trust Linux to implememt it properly? DS You guys funny! But to remind all you, with Servicepack 2 for XP, it is unpossible to execute injected code... Or did I understand something wrong? What you misunderstand is security. Probably the most accurate guage of effective security is the price for compromised computers. Last I heard it was five cents. I'm not sure, but I think I could do better with incredibly bad security. If there's only one hole, plugging it can make you a hero. Like the little Dutch boy sticking his finger in the dyke. For security, it's not where you are strongest that matters, it's where you are weakest. m
Re: Windows to copy open bsd
On 6/2/06, Dan Farrell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip (including captain fucktrust) has had any relevant input. snip Can't we all just get along ... and let this thread die a quiet death? in a second don quixote. 1) were all subscribed to misc@ :: use the force :: resist the reply all button. 2) http://catb.org/jargon/html/T/top-post.html 3) Eric appointed meaning to this thread.
Re: Windows to copy open bsd
On Fri, Jun 02, 2006 at 01:37:24PM -0700, akonsu wrote: in my understanding a proper implementation does not require any service packs. in other words: if one implements something that later requires a service pack, this is not a proper implementation. This is a nice idea, but everyone makes mistakes. Services packs, errata, patches and upgrades will always be with us. The frequency and nature of the problems they indicate do tell something of the developers and organization that produced the code, though. Can MS incorporate any given technology, and do it fairly well? Sure. Believe it or not they have some top coders on staff there. Except for the very beginning that's never been their problem. Does MS, as an organization, have a focus on quality code, as it applies to the *system* they produce? They'd like it, and take it when it doesn't get in the way of other goals. But in general, no, that's not their focus as I see it. The result being that any collection of individual technologies will help them to only a limited extent. They're all bandaids on a poorly designed system. The same kind of incorporation of technologies into OpenBSD (ProPolice, recent memory stuff, etc.) is different. How? They're added as mitigation techniques to a quality system where they're hardly and seldom needed. The quality was already there in the design. The system wasn't fragile without them. OpenBSD got a bit more immune. So... it's not a technology issue, it's about goals and management. Ask Theo and the other devs what OpenBSD's goals are. Wait, it's right there on the site. Does OpenBSD/OpenSSH/etc. match with those goals? Uh, huh. Ask Gates, Ballmer and crew what MS's goals are. Or find it on the MS site. If none of that works you can speculate (I'm not going to). Do you think their goals fall as much in line with what you want as does OpenBSD's goals? OK, I was going to stay out of this. Then I was going to write a short response. Now look what's happened! -- Darrin Chandler| Phoenix BSD Users Group [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://bsd.phoenix.az.us/ http://www.stilyagin.com/ |
Re: Windows to copy open bsd
Darrin Chandler wrote: Ask Gates, Ballmer and crew what MS's goals are. Or find it on the MS site. If none of that works you can speculate (I'm not going to). Do you think their goals fall as much in line with what you want as does OpenBSD's goals? Actually, this is very easy and does not require any speculation. The goal of any for-profit corporation is summed up in one line: Maximize shareholder profit. Therefore, MS will make it their goal to improve security only when it affects the bottom line. Most of the time they don't even have to improve security to affect the bottom line - they just have to go through the motions of appearing to improve security. If more people would come to understand the staggering importance of that single minded goal of any corporation the world would be a better place. Instead of appealing to corporations to exhibit the behaviours of a person, all we need to really worry about is appealing to (or threatening) their bottom line. Theo has been doing this for years, and he's one smart cookie. No, that image just does fit - Theo is one smart saltine cracker. :) Breeno
