Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 14th Mar 2007 17:52 UTC, submitted by Bernd
OpenBSD As recently reported on OpenBSD's errata page, a problem in the mbuf handling of IPv6 has been elevated to a security issue. This means that OpenBSD now has two remote exploits in 10 years, as already reflected on the OpenBSD Homepage. Theo advises to to update the system (or to block IPv6 using PF as a workaround).
Thread beginning with comment 221647
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[10]: Now... this is serious!
by mith on Thu 15th Mar 2007 13:04 UTC in reply to "RE[9]: Now... this is serious!"
mith
Member since:
2007-03-15

Moulinneuf... you should learn to read and interpret english (yes, yes... i know my english is far from perfect)

"BSD-Like" means that the license is not a BSD license (and probably has a completely diferent name) but most of the license is similar to BSD

When Soulbender said "None of the below projects are GPL:" he didn't said that it was BSD, he said it *WAS NOT* GPL, although not completely correct (because perl). Once again you misinterpreted someone and said he implied that all that projects where BSD License.

I will not comment all the others mistakes you made in all yours posts here. But you should read things carefully and try to not troll so much ;)

By the way... i am not a OpenBSD user (I use Mac OS X as Desktop/Development and Solaris 10/OpenSuse for 2 servers) but its common sense that OpenBSD is probably the most secure for a server... and again... if you do some googling about openbsd, the way their developers work and their goals, you will understand why probably OpenBSD is the most secure OS.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[12]: Now... this is serious!
by mith on Thu 15th Mar 2007 20:42 in reply to "RE[11]: Now... this is serious!"
mith Member since:
2007-03-15

Mith , my writing skil maybe poor but"
Your writing skill is ok... the problem is not that

I get BSD-Like[...]BSD contrary to some lies told and repeated is not a great license at all
Im a developer, and a BSD license is great for me because i can use their code in some closed source projects... (i use PostgreSQL and some minor BSD license based code) but that means that if i do some improvements to the base code i will submit the code to the developer(and yes... i already submited some code)... sorry but GPL does not suit my needs... but hey... its just my opinion and im not asking all of you to agree with me.

Miss-interpretation on my part witch he corrected.
sorry

Its common sense ? No , its propaganda based on lies and ommission. You see some people need there server to be secure , for much more then just data , they don't use OpenBSD , That's all I need to know , Beside first hand testing.
Just prove that with numbers and facts

The way there developer work ? Is highly laughable , there goals ? Goal imply something to achieve , they don't achieve any solution worth supporting otherwise they would do so them self.
Are you serious???

This discussion is pointless... you only see the Linux way... i love Linux, but that don't means that i will only use it. Linux has some strong points and some weak points like almost every operating system in the wild. So... Just open your mind a little more...

PS.: Once again... just compare the %$."!/#@ licenses and dont say again they are not BSD Like (like you replied to the BSDFan post) ... read things before spreading lies and misinformation.

Edited 2007-03-15 20:50

Reply Parent Score: 1

sbergman27 Member since:
2005-07-24

"""
They are the best at making excuses and blaming other's principally GNU/Linux.
"""

I don't really want to join this particular fray.

However, I'm just presumptuous enough to offer an unsolicited recommendation or two. ;-)

Presentation is every bit as important as substance.

Or for those whose tastes run more toward a "down home" style: "You catch more flies with honey than with vinegar".

If your goal is merely to state your case, then that's all you really have to do.

But if your goal is to *persuade*, then you have to start thinking in terms of optimizing your strategy.

Once a thread has become polarized, it is highly unlikely that anyone will be persuaded to see the other side's point of view.

Just about the only way that I know of to persuade (And its *far* from a sure fire approach; You just have to take your chances.) is to seek out a common ground, something that both sides can agree upon, and carefully work from there.

It can be tedious. It can be frustrating. But it can sometimes be educational, as well.

And it stands a lot better chance than any sort of frontal assault would.

Actually, there is one other way that I can think of to persuade. It's more circuitous and generalized, and not the sort of technique that you can really "point" at someone. And that is persuasion by setting a good example.

But I don't feel adequate to write that one up today. ;-)

Well, one last thought. Since persuasion can be a difficult activity, it pays to seriously consider exactly which points are actually worth applying one's efforts to.

Reply Parent Score: 2