To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
You're misunderstanding. I don't know anything about OpenBSD. I don't know what's available for it.
I'm asking is this security record is due to them being very good at making the operating system, or if its due to there being less features than other operating systems.
It may be as feature rich as others, I just don't know, so that's why I'm asking.
"The keyword here is 'default install'... a default OpenBSD install is really quite different to, say, a default Ubuntu Linux installation, or a default Windows Vista install.. "
Please don't confuse OpenBSD (or FreeBSD, NetBSD) with a Linux distribution. OpenBSD is "just" an OS, nothing more. If you install it, you have installed an operating system, nothing more, nothing less. In most cases, you are required to install additional software for the purposes you want to use your system, maybe as a mail server, a web server, a rescue system, a development system, or an "all possible purposes one size fits all" desktop workstation. You decide what's going to be installed.
If you want a BSD OS bundled with additional software (in the way most Linux distributions are), you will have to use PC-BSD or DesktopBSD.
By simply denying a lot of security issues.
http://pwnie-awards.org/winners.html#lamestvendor
By simply denying a lot of security issues.
Looks like they accepted this one as a vulnerability at last:
http://www.techworld.com/security/news/index.cfm?newsID=8278&pagtyp...
Did they deny any other issues?






Member since:
2005-12-15
How do they achieve this? Is it just very good practices and programming, or is it due to a lack of rich modern features?