OpenBSD Journal

Kevin Mitnick talks about OpenBSD

Contributed by marco on from the OpenBSD-on-the-radio dept.

We were amused to have someone mail us a report that Mitnick was baited into commenting on OpenBSD, on Coast to Coast AM. We are surprised that someone who only ever did social engineering, and knows nothing about real computer security would be put in such a position.

A mp3 excerpt is available of this quite ridiculous and hilarious interview.

This story was edited by the original poster since he didn't do his homework.

(Comments are closed)


Comments
  1. By Anonymous Coward (70.27.15.123) on

    Since when was he a hacker? He was a mediocre con artist, who got caught because he wasn't very good. He never hacked anything.

    Comments
    1. By Erik Carlseen (68.6.193.220) on

      It's true that he was more of a "social engineer" than a purely technical hacker (although he did have some technical skills). But that should just serve to remind us that while having difficult-to-exploit code and configurations are important, we should also be extremely mindful of the harm that can be done by people with legitimate access to the system and plan accordingly.

      Comments
      1. By Anonymous Coward (70.27.15.123) on

        Its not going to serve to remind anyone if people keep calling him a hacker and spreading the myth that he knows anything about computers.

        Comments
        1. By Erik Carlseen (68.6.193.220) on

          Ok, so we've gone from 'he's not much of a hacker' to 'he doesn't know anything about computers.' And we're supposed to take you seriously? Why? Because you post anonymous, whining posts about the MSM not knowing the difference between a cracker, a hacker, and a social engineer? Gee, you sure showed them. I bow to your m4d communication sk1llz. Surely this will turn heads in the New York news community.

          Comments
          1. By Anonymous Coward (70.27.15.123) on

            No, we've gone from "he's not a hacker he's a mediocre con artist" to "he's not a hacker he's a mediocre con artist". He doesn't know jack about computers, networking, programming, security or anything else relevant. Listen to the clip for christ's sake, its pretty clear that he knows nothing. He's just trying to cash in on his infamy. I'll assume by your bizzare "man communications skills" and "new york news community" nonsense that you must have dropped acid before posting this, but that's really no excuse. Your crazy and senseless crap just makes you look stupid. If you want to defend the guy, then at least try posting something that would indicate that he knows his stuff. Otherwise you're really in no position to bitch and moan about people correcting the article.

            Comments
            1. By Anonymous Coward (70.27.15.123) on

              Bah! Can we get the default post mode changed to plain text instead of html? How many people actually use html in their posts? I'd think more people would just like their paragraphs to stay intact.

              Comments
              1. By Anonymous Coward (202.45.99.9) on

                I concur with this assessment. In fact the only HTML I use is to keep my paragraphs intact, which stupidly can be achieved by selecting the plain text option.

            2. By Anonymous Coward (202.45.99.9) on

              He was talking to a radio audience, why should he sound any more technical than he did?

        2. By Anonymous Coward (202.45.99.9) on

          Thats a myth?

          Comments
          1. By lars (203.65.245.7) on

            Mostly.

      2. By Shane J Pearson (202.45.125.5) on

        we should also be extremely mindful of the harm that can be done by people with legitimate access to the system and plan accordingly

        Yes but there are limits to how much you can protect people and your company from themselves. Just recently I downloaded a beta firmware from a vendor website. My intentions being merely to read the release details text file to see whats happening in the development of this particular device. Up to this point, the company was obviously trying to keep the telnet password away from the customers, because there are dials accessible which, when tweaked by the ignorant, can damage the device configuration. Anyway the latest text file detailing the changes has the telnet root password left in it and lots of technical details which they obviously forgot to sanitize down to a bare minimum like they usually do.

        I found it an interesting read and tinkering around inside the CLI as root was interesting too. I informed them of this and got a "thank you for the feedback" type email, yet a week or two later the file remains with the root password there.

        They have stated before that they don't want customers playing in the CLI, the password could never be found in any doco or on the web and yet it only took ONE person to screw up. So I'm guessing that when that beta firmware "goes gold" it will also be with an updated password. BTW, the password was terrible. I probably could have guessed it if I had been determined, as it was a combination of brand name and model number with some substituted characters, like o for a zero.

        So yes, the person factor will always be there, but you can't protect completely against it.

  2. By Anonymous Coward (80.255.160.94) on

    And what is he saying about OpenBSD?

    Comments
    1. By Jace (12.199.169.62) on

      So where is the mp3 of Mitnick's interview like Henning Brauer’s interview for those of us who don't feel like registering at Coast to Coast or don't have iTunes?

      Comments
      1. By tedu (71.139.175.127) on

        maybe you should be asking coast to coast.

        Comments
        1. By Anonymous Coward (84.188.255.36) on

          Bullshit...
          I think such comerce-crap shouldn`t get noticed at the undeadly-news if nobody puts the mp3 free avaiable somewhere (a place where people without an account can get it...)

          I don`t see any free link there. All seams to be commercial and that is totaly fucked up.

          Comments
          1. By Anonymous Coward (67.64.89.177) on

            Settle down, I'll upload the mp3 when i have a spot to host it.

            Comments
            1. By Anonymous Coward (84.188.255.36) on

              You*re the "man of the day" :-)

              Comments
              1. By Nate (67.70.139.211) on

                And you're the stupid douche of mine.

                Comments
                1. By Anonymous Coward (69.70.207.240) on

                  That was lame dude.

                  Comments
                  1. By Nate (65.95.125.69) on

                    Whatever you say buddy, it was called for, cause some douche started being a whiney bitch.

    2. By Gamera (86.193.154.145) on

      He says "It's a great Linux.... err... well, it's a great Berkeley Unix"
      And then things about him using it a lot.

      That tells you a lot about the guy.

  3. By Anonymous Coward (68.106.232.57) on

    It wasn't horrible, although I have to say it made me wince when Mitnick called OpenBSD a Linux alternative. Once again, the media gets to place the overhyped Unix clone above a BSD. Bah.

    Comments
    1. By Anonymous Coward (69.70.207.240) on

      It made me cringe when I heard him say it's a Linux variant... Sure shows what he knows...

      Comments
      1. By GeekMan (145.99.249.60) on

        Lol, that was funny.. And I quote "For those of you who don't know.. OpenBSD is a linux variant, That made me laugh. And... Laugh some more"

  4. By Me (203.10.110.131) on

    "OpenBSD is ah, is a Linux variant, well not really Linu... it's
    really... ah ah ah... it's ah... ah it's a BSD Berkeley, but um it's a
    UNIX variant" - Kevin Mitnick, Computing and Social Engineering expert.

    Comments
    1. By Anonymous Coward (156.34.223.129) on

      To be fair, I couldn't judge Mitnik too harshly on this basis of this clip. He corrected himself immediately with the 'Linux-variant' comment. And sometimes it *is* easier to say 'an OS like Linux' or something to this affect when talking to non-geeks. He mentioned OpenBSD's security focus, and he only said good things about it ... I don't see a problem with his comment.

      My only problem with Kevin Mitnik is that I've never seen any evidence he is a 'computer security expert' (years ago perhaps, buy the standards of the day) -- perhaps a 'security expert' is less of a stretch. He should be more upfront about this fact.

      Comments
      1. By Anonymous Coward (212.254.168.247) on

        I agree, cut the guy some slack, he was scapegoated and did time just so the feds could brew up a media frenzy. Please remember that he was actually *denied* computer access for a pretty long time, iirc even after release.

        Having partially read his book, I would say he certainly knew a lot about telco's and 80's/90's computer systems. Whether that is still relevant is open, however, his social engineering work was brilliant if nothing else and outed the crap policies which are still in use at major corporations today.

        Comments
        1. By Anonymous Coward (194.145.162.162) on

          Yeah, you people need to be more forgiving of convicted felons who are making money from the fact, even though they haven't got a clue what they're talking about.

          Comments
          1. By Anonymous Coward (70.124.65.113) on

            Regardless of what you may think about Mitnick personally, nobody should be held in prison without a bail hearing or trial... for more than four years! I seem to recall something about a right to a speedy trial in some old constitutional document that nobody seems to care about nowadays.

            But he's just a "felon", right? That's the kind of thinking that has now brought us secret prisons and torture facilities.

            Comments
            1. By Anonymous Coward (128.171.90.200) on

              "nobody should be held in prison without a bail hearing or trial... for more than four years!"

              Call me un-american but I think being held in prison for four months let alone four years without trial to be a basic abuse of human rights.

    2. By Anonymous Coward (202.45.99.9) on

      He had to explain this to an audience who likely have never heard of BSD but could much more likely have heard of Linux. Who cares anyway, Linux and OpenBSD are so similiar expecially to a radio audience.

      Comments
      1. By Shane J Pearson (202.45.125.5) on

        Who cares anyway, Linux and OpenBSD are so similiar expecially to a radio audience.

        The question is regarding OpenBSD and OpenBSD deserves the sentences required to describe it and make sure the distinction is known. If someone asked me what OpenBSD was:

        * An operating system is the glue software between the hardware, applications and users.

        * UNIX is an operating system designed to allow multiple users to use a computer at the same time, often with different applications, which started life at the Bell Telephone Labs in the 60's. It was licensed to the University of California Berkeley for development, some of which helped to devise the foundation networking protocols used on the internet today. Eventually the licensing became free of monetary costs, given a very free licence for use and then was modified for use on cheap computers which were within the reach of the public.

        * OpenBSD is a modern evolution of that software, which strives for local and network security and correctness of program code, among other things. Efforts which have shown OpenBSD to be one of, if not the most secure network operating system in the World, yet it is still offered free of charge and can be downloaded from the Internet for any particular computer type at around 150MB or less, depending on your computer type and what you need.

        * OpenBSD is often compared with Linux and even mistaken as being a flavour of Linux. However although they seem similar both being UNIX like operating systems, they are very much distinct from each other in many ways, even besides the fact that they are completely different code bases. OpenBSD is developed as a complete system by the same dedicated developers. Linux on the other hand is a mostly useless operating system kernel by itself. It is developed separately to the many other software components which make up a complete usable Linux system. Various people and companies then put these components together the best way they see fit in their own distribution. As a result the quality of the multitude of Linux distributions available can vary a great deal, whereas OpenBSD has a very polished complete and consistent feel about it.

        * OpenBSD also only allows source code to be included in the default system and not unknown 3rd party binaries which could corrupt stability or security. Relying on 3rd parties is a great way to find yourself at the mercy of those 3rd parties when they suddenly loose interest or worse still honest intentions. Even then where possible, the source code must be licensed under something as liberal as the truly free BSD licence and certainly not the restrictive GPL licence which accompanies much Linux and GNU software. The complete source code to OpenBSD is also of course available to anyone.

        How hard was that? That takes me a bit over 2 minutes to read out loud at a leisurely pace. Anyone with a vague understanding could pay OpenBSD the respect it deserves. Saying something like "OpenBSD is a Linux variant, well not really, it's a BSD, but it's like Linux", is just a cop out.

        Comments
        1. By Anonymous Coward (193.63.217.208) on

          Yet in that two minute piece you have lost 95%+ of the radio audience in jargon they don't understand and probably don't care about. You start talking about kernels and people will either:

          1) Think you are talking about nuts

          or

          2) Think you *are* nuts

          or

          3) Start wondering when their favourite jingle will be played next

          I won't defend Mitnick at all but he did talk on the same level as the audience is listening (Yes, I do think that radio audiences a usually hazy and uncertain about computers). Even your effort to dumb down OpenBSD still uses plenty of terms the radio audience doesn't get or care about.

          Comments
          1. By Shane J Pearson (202.45.125.5) on

            Yet in that two minute piece you have lost 95%+ of the radio audience in jargon they don't understand and probably don't care about.

            You mean the 95% who were not ever going to try OpenBSD anyway?

            You start talking about kernels

            And of course the presenter would not query me at all about any specifics, right? Cause these tend to be one way conversations? Get serious. Giving this level of detail will be useful to some listeners. Giving very little detail will be of little use to everyone. There is nothing wrong with using terms that are new to people. It will provoke discussion and some into looking further into those terms and issues.

            In reality, "Linux" is about as meaningful to those types as "kernel" in the OS context is. They might think they know what Linux is, but in reality, they don't. At least making the distinction will be thought provoking for those that would care. For those that don't care? Who cares.

            Comments
            1. By Anonymous Coward (131.104.175.17) on

              You mean the 95% who were not ever going to try OpenBSD anyway? The radio show doesn't care if people find the interview useful or if people start using OpenBSD because of it. They only care that the content is interesting enough to keep people listening so that they can charge more for their commercials. The rather obvious, if cliché, conclusion is that when you run your own radio show, you can rant on the air about the beauty of OpenBSD all you want.

              Comments
              1. By Anonymous Coward (202.45.125.5) on

                The radio show doesn't care if people find the interview useful or if people start using OpenBSD because of it. They only care that the content is interesting enough to keep people listening so that they can charge more for their commercials. The rather obvious, if cliché, conclusion is that when you run your own radio show, you can rant on the air about the beauty of OpenBSD all you want.

                I'm well aware of the fact that almost all forms of spectator entertainment around us, are really about getting eyes and ears onto advertisements to get products into peoples heads.

                But if I am the person being interviewed on a radio station, I am not the advertiser and the advertiser is not paying me. If I'm asked about something like OpenBSD, I'll answer honestly as *I* see fit. If the advertiser and radio station does not like it, too bad, they'll have to deal with that in what ever way they can. A difficult task if it is a truely live show. But I think the truth is much more interesting than saying, "Oh this system you know nothing about is just like this other system you know nothing about".

                Anyway, enough of this. I just think OpenBSD deserves a lot more than to just be placed into the "oh it's like Linux" category.

  5. By Anonymous Coward (82.53.168.117) on

    Pathetic!

    Comments
    1. By squeege (192.139.71.69) on

      Mitnick has admitted himself that he is no computer guru, that his most notable exploits were achieved through social engineering.

      That being said, he does have some idea of how a computer works; he was remotely breaking into Unix systems in the mid-90's.

      The exploit that landed him jail time is well documented, and I would dare say it's sophisticated enough for him to qualify as a cracker. See links below:

      How Mitnick Hacked Tsutomu Shimomura with an IP Sequence Attack (by Tsutomu Shimomura)

      The Kevin Mitnick/Tsutomu Shimomura affair (Compiled by Chris Gulker )

      Now, that's out of the way, so let me step on my soap-box:

      You know, on the whole, I think the OpenBSD community is mature, well-intended and well-spoken; but when I see ridiculous posts (like some of those above) that totally bash someone based on opinion rather than fact, it's really disappointing.

      The whole BSD is better than Linux diatribe, spelling it "Windoze" or "WinDOS", name-calling and all other juvenile / reactionary garbage seen on forums and mailing lists is totally counter-productive. You totally lose credibility when you stoop to that level.

      I, and many IT professionals I know, just stop reading a post when things degenerate to that point... so ask yourself: what are you accomplishing if no one is taking you seriously?

      Comments
      1. By Anonymous Coward (143.166.226.19) on

        Mitnick was what you call today a "script kiddy". Thanks for your moral diatribe. We now know how much you truely know about the subject.

        Comments
        1. By squeege (69.28.228.218) on

          Sorry if my moral diatribe bored you, or inconvenienced you in any way.

          Imagine how people feel when they are personally attacked and called names for not sharing the same point of view on a topic; or when others have to wade through a bunch of immature bitching, rather than read intelligent and respectful exchanges of thoughts/opinions between people...

          As for Mitnick's skills, it's all a matter of perspective; yes, by today's standard he might qualifiy as a script-kiddie - as with anything, computer security has evolved and gotten more sophisticated, so it's all relative.

      2. By Anonymous Coward (70.27.15.123) on

        "The whole BSD is better than Linux diatribe, spelling it "Windoze" or "WinDOS", name-calling and all other juvenile / reactionary garbage seen on forums and mailing lists is totally counter-productive. You totally lose credibility when you stoop to that level."

        Nobody is doing that. Maybe you should keep your bizzare mental problems to yourself? We really don't need to know about every random thing that comes into your head.

        "I, and many IT professionals I know, just stop reading a post when things degenerate to that point... so ask yourself: what are you accomplishing if no one is taking you seriously?"

        Well, it would accomplish making people like yourself stop reading, which is good. Hopefully you'll stop writing too. "boo hoo, I am a self important douche that thinks he's the only IT professional on the planet, and I can't handle seeing people prefer BSD to linux", get a grip. Lots of people are IT professionals, and lots of us make fun of retards like you for being annoying, whiney, pompous jackoffs.

        Downloading and running exploit code doesn't make someone a cracker, it makes them a script kiddy. Mitnik relies on the misconceptions about his abilities to make money running nessus against people's systems.

        Comments
        1. By squeege (69.28.228.218) on

          Thanks for making my point for me... your immature and reactionary response is exactly what I'm talking about. Guess I struck a nerve?

          Have you actually bothered to read the whole thread? Or really listen to the Mitnick clip? Or visit the links I provided? (Doesn't look like it.)

          Some people in posts above are blowing things out of proportion about Mitnick's slip of the tongue; others are going nuts over OpenBSD being lumped together with Linux. (Even though he caught his slip and corrected himself immediately and accurately.)

          My point is that we don't need to resort to all this flaming over a harmless comment; what is it accomplishing?

          You think Mitnick is a script-kiddie? Good for you. The SANS institute seems to disagree with you; but hey, what do some of the top people in the InfoSec field know about it?

          No matter his level of technical savvy, he managed several notable exploits. Whether that is through social engineering or other methods, he got it done.

          If you're such an expert on Mitnick - why don't you write a book to discredit him. Throw in a chapter on my mental problems while you're at it...

          P.S. Did you notice I didn't need to do any name calling to answer your post?


          Best regards,

          Squeege

      3. By Anonymous Coward (68.104.17.51) on

        Sorry that I do not want to be classed together with the shoddy kludged together thing that is Linux. Guess I must be a reactionary because I want to distance myself from the following: supposedly the most popular distribution of linux shipping an installer that saves the initial user name and password in plaintext in a world readable file, and that not being noticed or fixed until the next release. and i don't want to be associated with the congratulations that get given to that distribution for "fixing it so quickly".

        Comments
        1. By Anonymous Coward (202.6.138.33) on

          Is that ubuntu problem really a problem?
          Who uses ubuntu in a multiuser environment? Go on, name one organisation.

          Comments
          1. By Anonymous Coward (68.104.17.51) on

            the original thread where this was disclosed is filled with people concerned about it. in south africa it's being pushed big for schools and small business, but i tend to not religiously track ubuntu usage. I think actual ubuntu users would know the impact better than you.

            Comments
            1. By Anonymous Coward (202.6.138.33) on

              I think actual ubuntu users would know the impact better than you.

              More often than not Ubuntu users don't know anything at all about the OS.

        2. By squeege (69.28.228.218) on

          I agree about Linux being kludge, I don't like it either - but it has its uses. I'm not crazy about all the hype surrounding Linux either.

          Trust me, if I had the choice, I would exclusively use OpenBSD; the reality is that what OpenBSD does, it does great - but it can't do everything I need to get my work done.

          If OpenBSD had all the hacking tools, or a live CD like Auditor, Pentoo, WHAX, etc. I would not bother with Linux.

          Why some people have to turn a matter of preference into a pointless shouting match is what I have a problem with.

          There's nothing wrong with discussing these matters - but within the confines of respect; there's no good reason it has degenerate into name calling.

  6. By Anonymous Coward (67.95.137.210) on

    It's of critical importance to differentiate how Mitnick attacked the systems he did. At the end of the day he still broke into the systems, with a combination of social engineering and technical skills with emphasis on social engineering. So how much does it matter that you know more about computers and computer security than Mitnick does? HE STILL GOT IN! The weakest link in an OpenBSD network (or any network) is often the end user. A lot of posters here seem smug, almost arrogant in their attitudes. It takes skill to be a good social engineer as it does to be a good kernel hacker. So no matter how brilliant Theo and the rest of the OBSD crowd is, they can be defeated by someone less technically sophisticated.

    Comments
    1. By Anonymous Coward (70.27.15.123) on

      Read the reply to the post below. The story previously called him a hacker. We simply corrected that error. Quit crying about poor Dicknick, he's making plenty of money scamming people by pretending to be a computer security expert.

  7. By Alan DeWitt (70.58.207.244) on

    Technical skill may come and go, but social engineering will work forever.

    To all those folks here dismissing Mitnick as *just* a con artist, I would like to remind you that if a con artist is attacking your system your OS is irrelevant. OpenBSD may be highly resistant to technical attack, but technical safeguards are just one part of the security model. Con artists are likely to be the biggest threat to your system's privacy and integrity. Don't get complacent.

    Comments
    1. By Anonymous Coward (70.27.15.123) on

      Uh, nobody is dismissing him. We were simply correcting the previously misleading story that said he was a hacker. Just because I point out that you aren't an astronaut, doesn't mean I am dismissing you, I am just showing the truth.

      Comments
      1. By Alan DeWitt (70.58.207.244) on

        Then I guess you're not one of those folks. :-)

  8. By Tyler Mace (24.208.119.74) on

    Kevin may not be the worlds foremost expert on computer security, but I think the guy deserves a bit of credit. He may also be more of social engineer than that of a 'hacker', but the guy had enough technical know how to perform some attacks on computers at the Super Computer Center there in San Diego in a manner that not many people were performing at the time (tcp sequence attacks if I recall). Stop poking fun and learn where respect is due. The guy is talking up the operating system we all know and love after all.

    Comments
    1. By Anonymous Coward (82.53.168.117) on

      Probably, it wasn't Mitnick, but an Israeli guy whose nickname was "jsz" to arrange the spoofing attack for him (or at least Shimomura said this)

      Comments
      1. By Amir Mesry (66.23.227.241) on

        http://interviews.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/02/04/2233250&mode=nocomment&tid=103&tid=123&tid=172 He wasn't just a social Engineer, he actually had skills. Do your research before you say he was just a Social Engineer.

        Comments
        1. By Anonymous Coward (67.64.89.177) on

          ooh ooh its on slashdot so its true!

          Comments
          1. By sparky (68.148.192.129) sparky@stinkys.ca on

            why is it always the anonyous cowards that talk like they are 10' tall? If your going to be an ass, be man enough to put your name on it. I came here looking to read some insightful comments like those I am used to, and I find a bunch of adolesents trying to prove they are smater than everyone in the sandbox. Grow up and get a clue, you ruined this whole page for many of us!

            Comments
            1. By Anonymous Coward (67.64.89.177) on

              Do an IP address to Name find. I am all over the place. Just don't bother to type my name all the time. Slashdot is an equal scam as Mitnick. More power to him that he can spam people. The ones paying for his services deserve the quality he gives them.

              Comments
              1. By Amir Mesry (66.23.227.241) on

                That opinion seems to have so much force behind it, that is seems like fact, but it doesn't hold up when compared to the real facts that are available on other places besides slashdot if you actually bother looking.

  9. By Ryan Russell (64.81.246.227) ryan@thievco.com on

    Wow, what an amazingly biased personal attack from the story submitter. I'm curious as to what you know about what Kevin knows, and what your criteria are for "knowing anything about real computer security".

    Comments
    1. By Anonymous Coward (130.179.16.26) on

      Callers question:
      I would like to know what his (Mitnicks) opinion is of the operating system OpenBSD.

      Mitnicks response:
      Well I actually use OpenBSD, so I do like it.

      Then he goes on to say that OpenBSD is a Linux variant, but he corrects himself and says that it's a BSD.
      He mentions that it has been developed with secure coding practices and that the OS is much more secure than the standard UNIX.
      Then Art Bell mentions that allot of people who are really into computers really love that operating system (OpenBSD).

      The caller was just asking a question (not baiting), If mitnick would have answered "What is OpenBSD?" then I agree that this would have been ridiculous and hilarious.
      He knows about OpenBSD, he uses it, and likes it.

      Most of the 4.5 million (EST. Wired, Feb 2006) listeners at two in the morning will probably never hear of OpenBSD again.

      Maybe Mitnick knows security, maybe he doesn't. His interview, (and the one he did on the show a while back) speaks of basic security measures for windows (which is what his target audience is using). If his audience were of the CanSecWest type, then maybe we would see what he really knows.

      Comments
      1. By Anonymous Coward (67.64.89.177) on

        Wired is totally lame.

  10. By Jonas (85.226.192.15) on

    Atleast he had the balls to do it unlike most other people.

    Comments
    1. By Anonymous Coward (67.64.89.177) on

      Balls for what? Commit a crime? What is wrong with you people?

  11. By Anonymous Coward (63.19.147.223) on

    Well, why doesn't Art Bell use OpenBSD ? I wonder what he uses ? Gee, I guess Keven could have just said it is a secure os and no one would be talking. Perhaps next week they will claim OpenBSD is like alien technology come from zercon. Hey folks this is Coast to Coast AM we are talking about, remember ?

  12. By Roman (169.200.215.17) on

    So a infamous man convicted of computer crimes who is probably paranoid out of his mind about his machine getting audited by the US government chooses to use OpenBSD, makes a incorrect statement then corrects himself, sites one of the most the most important aspects of providing a secure system (correct coding practices) as a strong point, and generally advocates the system this is what comes of it? LOL

    Comments
    1. By Anonymous Coward (221.254.245.147) on

      Exactly.

Latest Articles

Credits

Copyright © - Daniel Hartmeier. All rights reserved. Articles and comments are copyright their respective authors, submission implies license to publish on this web site. Contents of the archive prior to as well as images and HTML templates were copied from the fabulous original deadly.org with Jose's and Jim's kind permission. This journal runs as CGI with httpd(8) on OpenBSD, the source code is BSD licensed. undeadly \Un*dead"ly\, a. Not subject to death; immortal. [Obs.]