OpenBSD Journal

SF columnist praises "Secure by Default"

Contributed by grey on from the we like being patted on the back dept.

Jason Miller, columnist for SecurityFocus writes some praise on OpenBSD's "Secure by Default" stance in this editorial piece which can be found here: http://www.securityfocus.com/columnists/241

(Comments are closed)

Comments

  1. By grey (64.139.7.172) on

    Jason's assertion that this might be news to Redmond isn't 100% on the money, as MS has been parroting the line, if not the track record, from OpenBSD since 2003 (as seen here:

    http://www.microsoft.com/uk/windowsserversystem/exchange/product-information/features-at-a-glance/security.mspx

    and here:

    http://www.alchemistowl.org/arrigo/images/RSA2003-Microsoft-Arrigo-small.jpg)

    Also, while Jason claims he's not an OpenBSD zealot, the zealots (or at least frequent users) of OpenBSD will probably have noticed that OpenBSD now presents the option of whether to enable sshd by default during install. Albeit, OpenBSD wasn't the first to have that as an option (it tries to be relatively 'functional' by default as well), but it's a recent change worth mentioning at least.

    Comments

    1. By Anonymous Coward (4.42.65.82) on

      It looks like Microsoft was afraid of mentioning OpenBSD in http://www.microsoft.com/uk/windowsserversystem/exchange/product-information/features-at-a-glance/security.mspx. Before reading, I searched for the word OpenBSD and BSD and did not find any. Does Microsoft likes to steal ideas and not mention any credits?

      Comments

      1. By Anonymous Coward (205.240.34.204) on

        > Does Microsoft likes to steal ideas and not mention any credits? You even have to ask? It wouldn't surprise me if Microsoft trys to trademark the phrase. Maybe Theo should beat them to the punch and block thier attempt to confuse a legitmate design philosophy with a sales gimmick.

      2. By kcg (3ffe:bc0:8000::4181) on

        Does M$ needs to mention any BSD when they steal any code from them? I don't think so, BSD license give them any power over source and they already proofed that they are not nice citizen of IT community. :-( Karel

  2. By Anonymous Coward (67.64.89.177) on

    Useless. Don't waste your time reading this infantile article.

    Comments

    1. By Anonymous Coward (67.71.24.150) on

      I just watched a video with (Steve Baldman, er.. Balmer) comparing Windows 2000 and 2003 security to RedHat 6 - what a joke! RH 6 of all... I know this may seem off topic, but my point is that he's trying to compare RedHat (as a definition) of OSS, as a whole. What I'd love to see though is comparison to OpenBSD or even any video interviews with Theo or anyone from the OpenBSD core development team. Even if it's not comparing to Windows, which isn't OpenBSD's goal, unlike Linux, I think it would be great to watch and get more media attention than all the commercialized Linux hype. The link is here, incase anyone wants to see it: http://news.com.com/1606-2-741058.html?tag=st.rb Anyone happen to know if there's any video interviews with *BSD developers available? AC.

      Comments

      1. By Anonymous Coward (67.71.24.150) on

        Cripes, I forgot the formatting on this one. :( Sorry!

      2. By Anonymous Coward (196.30.79.198) on

        It appears that steveb@microsoft.com doesn't like 'hackers' in China very much... Bigot.

    2. By Bruce C. Miller (69.68.45.245) on

      I agree. It's like reading a 5th grader's report about what he did over the summer. Hey Jason, congrats on learning how to type. Now, learn how to write.

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.]