Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

OpenBSD Foundation At Risk Of Shutting Down

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Sergio
    Proven? Are you stupid? You've proved NOTHING. Stop your pointless, stupid and shortsighed rethoric already! Theo has done for free software more than you will do in your entire life (if you do something at all). Like I said, leave the real work to those with the knowledge, talent and leadership to show the path, like Theo.
    Once again this BSD loser (Sergio) proves how stupid he is. Palwerson has already said that why TdR's a hippocrite.

    TdR accuses Linux distros of using binary blobs while he himself uses to proprietary friendly BSDL and also proprietary blobs in OpenBSD.

    TdR is a Loser,
    Last edited by endman; 01-23-2014, 02:48 AM.

    Comment


    • This triple post was brought to you by:

      Phoronix
      "5 minutes to edit your posts."

      Comment


      • Man, I like these threads, they are quite effective at improving my ignore list

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Pawlerson View Post
          - bsd which is an academic style license doesn't fit into modern world, because it doesn't provide any protection against competition,
          That's not what licenses are for.

          Originally posted by Pawlerson View Post
          - OpenBSD is less secure than Linux and even FreeBSD.
          Prove it or you're wrong.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Pawlerson View Post
            It seems it's yours only argument, because you, Sergio and any other bsd fanboy can't deny facts which have been said about bsd. Summing up the things bellow have been proven so far:

            - TdR is a hypocrite,
            - bsd which is an academic style license doesn't fit into modern world, because it doesn't provide any protection against competition,
            - OpenBSD is less secure than Linux and even FreeBSD.
            - I've proved to you that Theo has done more for the community than you'll ever even dream of doing (by the way, what have you done?)
            - That should explain why YOU depend on BSD-licensed software to troll over here...
            - It is fairly obvious by now, but I'll say it: you are LIGHT YEARS away from having the knowledge to at least give an opinion about this.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Pawlerson View Post
              ...
              - OpenBSD is less secure than Linux and even FreeBSD.
              Troll or not, funny you should suggest that. Here's something funny:

              [03] HAS SDF EVER BEEN COMPROMISED?

              The first time was in 1991 when a person from France dialed in
              to our machine (then running SystemVr3.2 1.0) and was able to get
              root (administrative) access. He promptly notified us.

              During our short lived stint of attempting to run SDF under 'linux' on
              IBM compatibles the system was compromised a number of times, but the
              individuals who did it were much more secretive and malicious. For
              each case users were forced to change their passwords and patched
              software was installed (though this of course introduced other bugs
              that could be found later on)

              After dumping linux and x86 in favour of return to real computers, we
              have not had any major security issues. We are however, just as vigilant
              to be sure that your account here on SDF is safe and that any security
              issues are resolved quickly before public announcements (cert, et cetera)


              Please NOTE, an administrator will NEVER ask you for your password.
              Anyone impersonating an administrator is BREAKING THE LAW. You can
              report them to your local authorities if you identify them.
              SDF actually runs NetBSD and not OpenBSD. But it's still pretty funny considering your suggestion that OpenBSD (or any BSD) be less secure than Linux.

              That happened a decade ago. I don't really believe any of these systems are superior in security to any other by any large margin and I think it really depends mostly on the configuration and usage.

              Comment


              • It is amusing how Pawlerson (+his other accounts) manages to troll every BSD thread on phoronix and people are still falling for it.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Pawlerson View Post
                  Too bad they're cannot prove what they have written. It looks like bsd fanboys bullshit. Nothing more. It's funny to consider OpenBSD to be more secure. As far as I know it doesn't even provide MAC and FreeBSD doesn't have ASLR. It's just laughable.
                  Haha.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Pawlerson View Post
                    1. No, you didn't. I don't care what he did, but compared to Linus or Stallman he did nothing. I just proved he's a hippo and you can't deny this. I would respect him if he wasn't talking so much bulltshit and if he wasn't using proprietary friendly license.
                    2. I depend mostly on GPL software.
                    3. Read an article and prove it's wrong. It's not surprising OpenBSD is rarely used on servers. If it was secure it would be used more often.
                    1. What about compared to YOU? (I'm still waiting to read about your contributions).
                    Exactly HOW did you prove he is a hippo?
                    2. So you do use "proprietary-friendly" licensed software... HYPOCRITE
                    3. Here, take a look at some of the technics pioneered by OpenBSD: http://tech.yandex.com/events/ruBSD/2013/talks/103/

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Pawlerson View Post
                      It seems you have missed article I gave a link to.
                      This is the main reason why OpenBSD is unable to offer a secure environment in the event an attacker is successful. Instead of implementing a form of extended access controls and ensuring the system is secure even in the event of a successful attack, they prefer to remove as many vulnerabilities as possible. This approach is na?ve at best and arrogant at worst.
                      You probably giggled and thought to post it on phoronix, totally missing this part.
                      I am aware that many people use OpenBSD for nothing more than a router, and for this it indeed ideal. For the use of a router, extended access controls would not provide much benefit. I wrote this argument however because many people seem convinced that OpenBSD has suerior security in all instances and including as a network server or user operating system. I became tired of reading these comments and people simply dismissing extended access controls as too complex and not providing any real security.
                      Good job making yourself look like a butthead.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X