Linked by Jordan Spencer Cunningham on Thu 27th Aug 2009 20:31 UTC
Games The recent release of the PS3 Slim brought about joy for those who were waiting for a less expensive/smaller gaming system and indignation for those who were waiting for a Linux experimental machine of the same type as there was no "OtherOS" or Linux option on this model. Why? we cry sadly. Because, the deep, omniscient voices of two Sony representatives boom back.
Thread beginning with comment 381087
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: more secure
by nt_jerkface on Thu 27th Aug 2009 21:47 UTC in reply to "more secure"
nt_jerkface
Member since:
2009-08-26

To all the people above : making it run linux actually makes it more secure.


Secure against what? You must hold the simplistic notion that Linux has mythical status when it comes to security. If you are going to hold any OS in that regard it should be OpenBSD.

When Sony allows an general OS instead of a limited embedded OS they are compromising the security of the system, mainly in regard to local activities.

As for outside threats you have no reason to believe that installing Linux would make the system safer. In fact you could argue that installing Linux puts you at greater outside risk for exploits since it is a widely used system.

I think some people here obviously don't like that Sony is doing this but there is rational behind it. If I am selling a streaming media box and I don't want people copying the movies it is much safer to lock the user into an embedded OS that provides limited functionality rather than allowing a general purpose OS to be installed.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: more secure
by renhoek on Thu 27th Aug 2009 21:53 in reply to "RE: more secure"
renhoek Member since:
2007-04-29

Please try to read more than once sentence, i know it's hard but you might get my point. My point was that if they allow to install an alternative os an entire hurd of hackers will lose interest. I know this falls in the "security by obscurity" kind of thinking, but it works.

[edit] Maybe i wasn't clear i was talking about the security from the Sony point of view. So no copied games could be run.

Edited 2009-08-27 21:55 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: more secure
by ichi on Thu 27th Aug 2009 22:04 in reply to "RE[2]: more secure"
ichi Member since:
2007-03-06

Agreed.

As far as I know there's no "native" homebrew for the PS3, as it was all being developed for linux.
It's also the only console where you can't load pirated games (yet).

Edited 2009-08-27 22:05 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: more secure
by nt_jerkface on Thu 27th Aug 2009 22:24 in reply to "RE[2]: more secure"
nt_jerkface Member since:
2009-08-26

Please try to read more than once sentence, i know it's hard but you might get my point. My point was that if they allow to install an alternative os an entire hurd of hackers will lose interest.


You said:

The entire linux-must-run-on-my-toaster crowd is happy, so they will not try to hack your system.


When you open the system you OPEN THE SYSTEM.

Trying to placate the homebrew crowd by making it open only invites the crowd that wants to cheat/pirate the games. It isn't as if there is a single crowd of homebrew hackers with good intentions that will only work on cheating/piracy exploits if they are offended.

Reply Parent Score: 0