Linked by Eugenia Loli on Sat 12th Aug 2006 19:07 UTC
OpenBSD OpenBSD strives to be the most secure UNIX derivation. Design principles, such as code auditing, extensive use of encryption, and careful configuration choices, combine to ensure OpenBSD's secure by default philosophy holds true. This article gives you a close look at the operating system so secure that it was once banned for use in a DEF CON competition, where crackers go after each other's systems.
Thread beginning with comment 152046
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: NX without NX
by Janizary on Sun 13th Aug 2006 22:50 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: NX without NX"
Member since:

No, Apache not being updated is because of the disgusting mess of a licence that Apache now uses. The security patches being ignored was why the developers dislike the Apache project, not the reason they will never use any of their newer code.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[5]: NX without NX
by Gryzor on Sun 13th Aug 2006 23:08 in reply to "RE[4]: NX without NX"
Gryzor Member since:

LOL, you misunderstood me (or perhaps I expressed myself incorrectly).

I meant Apache Group won't accept patches from OBSD group. And OBSD group won't accept unpatched versions from Apache; then there's the Licence issue which is for real... the new Apache 2.0 Licence is a "mess of a licence" (sic) ;)

But there are other projects that could be used as an example, most "semi-important" pieces of software in OpenBSD (Apache, Bind, Samba, Sendmail, etc.) have OpenBSD Patches; some of these patches make it to the originals, some are not accepted... unfortunely.

Then we have the Licences issues, if it's not really free, it won't make it.

Then you have "old and huge" problems like the QMail story... but that's another (long) story. ;)

Reply Parent Score: 2