From owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Mon Jun 8 15:44:59 2020 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AEC49333938 for ; Mon, 8 Jun 2020 15:44:59 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from galtsev@kicp.uchicago.edu) Received: from kicp.uchicago.edu (kicp.uchicago.edu [128.135.20.70]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49gcyL5qQtz3Z37 for ; Mon, 8 Jun 2020 15:44:58 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from galtsev@kicp.uchicago.edu) Received: from point.uchicago.edu (point.uchicago.edu [128.135.52.6]) (Authenticated sender: galtsev) by kicp.uchicago.edu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 397424E65C; Mon, 8 Jun 2020 10:44:58 -0500 (CDT) Subject: Re: freebsd vs. netbsd To: Anatoli Cc: FreeBSD Mailing List References: <171506d5-19aa-359e-c21d-f07257c52ebd@freenetMail.de> <62d10000-e068-922e-23bd-f7a61e7a4e89@anatoli.ws> <6a4f6a15-ec43-03f6-1a41-a109e445f026@anatoli.ws> From: Valeri Galtsev Message-ID: Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2020 10:44:57 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <6a4f6a15-ec43-03f6-1a41-a109e445f026@anatoli.ws> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 49gcyL5qQtz3Z37 X-Spamd-Bar: - Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; dmarc=fail reason="No valid SPF, No valid DKIM" header.from=uchicago.edu (policy=none); spf=none (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of galtsev@kicp.uchicago.edu has no SPF policy when checking 128.135.20.70) smtp.mailfrom=galtsev@kicp.uchicago.edu X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-1.39 / 15.00]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-0.91)[-0.908]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-0.39)[-0.393]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; TO_DN_ALL(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.19)[-0.186]; RCPT_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; R_SPF_NA(0.00)[no SPF record]; RCVD_NO_TLS_LAST(0.10)[]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; ASN(0.00)[asn:160, ipnet:128.135.0.0/16, country:US]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; DMARC_POLICY_SOFTFAIL(0.10)[uchicago.edu : No valid SPF, No valid DKIM,none] X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.33 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 08 Jun 2020 15:44:59 -0000 On 2020-06-08 09:25, Anatoli wrote: >> The most secure… if you dismiss the fact that one of the developer (who wrote network stack if my memory serves me) was simultaneously receiving payments from one of three letter agencies for several years. > > Rumors + FUD or do you have any proof? > When I heard that I checked, and receipt of payments was confirmed by developer himself. That is my recollection, I am merely human whose memory can not be perfect, check that on your own. This even if confirmed as a fact, does not mean he left back doors or weak spots in code. The rest is for everyone: to do one's own home work: 1. who don't care just dismiss what is said 2. Who do care to verify if receipt of payments is the fact, just verify on your own (I never think of myself to be considered the source of absolute truth. Merely as a help to point into direction where who is interested may find something helpful) If one verifies the fact of payment(s), the decide for yourself: A. Audit the code (I for one realize I will not be able to find fishy spots in that sophisticated code, so this can not be my choice) B. Accept that it is likely that good enough programmers did audit code, hence there are no weak (or worse) spots in it C. Accept that what top programmer wrote is not that easy to audit, and just shy away from what may (just merely may) be not quite kosher. If you care, of course. And again, do your own thinking, this may, just merely may help someone. Valeri > On 8/6/20 10:26, Valeri Galtsev wrote: >> >> >>> On Jun 7, 2020, at 11:26 PM, Anatoli wrote: >>> >>> IMO >>> >>> * FreeBSD: servers (performance, stability, relative security, zfs), >>> competes directly with Linux >>> >>> * OpenBSD: routers/firewalls, desktops (the most secure OS >> >> The most secure… if you dismiss the fact that one of the developer (who wrote network stack if my memory serves me) was simultaneously receiving payments from one of three letter agencies for several years. >> >> Valeri >> >>> and a really >>> good desktop, but its absence of server-class performance is its >>> weakest side + no zfs (just ffs2) and limited virtualization (no SMP) >>> so not suitable for any serious server load where absolute security is >>> not a must). The king in its niche (paranoid security) >>> >>> * NetBSD: toasters & freezers (runs on anything, otherwise not sure >>> what's the point :), competes with FreeBSD and Linux (and Linux now >>> supports more archs/platforms than Net). IMO no clear vision and thus >>> attracts too little resources both human and economic. IMO midterm not >>> much hope for survival, same as DFly and smaller BSDs. >>> >>> I believe that OS development is an economy of scale (doing things more >>> efficiently or having other advantaged with increasing size) with a >>> tendency for a monopoly in the same niche. >>> >>> There are some features that the larger players establish as a >>> commodity, but that are very time-intensive and complex to develop (e.g. >>> virtualization, wifi ac and now ax). So what Linux implemented more than >>> a decade ago, the BSDs are just catching up now. >>> >>> Linux world had 2 "obstacles" to its almost flawless growth recently >>> (systemd and a ZFS alternative). Now that the things have almost settled >>> up, if they don't commit any more serious errors I don't see how the >>> BSDs (except OpenBSD as it's not a direct competitor) could compete with >>> it in the long term. >>> >>> Now with ZoL/OpenZFS the long-term future even for FreeBSD is not that >>> clear (and the recent iX decisions [1] [2] are a clear sign). >>> >>> [1] https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2020/06/truenas-isnt-abandoning-bsd-but-it-is-adopting-linux/ >>> [2] https://www.truenas.com/TrueOS-Discontinuation/ >>> >>> >>> On 7/6/20 22:35, Wesley wrote: >>>> greetings, >>>> >>>> There were freebsd and netbsd (maybe others?) in BSD world. >>>> What points did they focus by design? >>>> what are their use scenes then? >>>> >>>> Thank you. >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list >>>> https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions >>>> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >>> _______________________________________________ >>> freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list >>> https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions >>> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >> >> _______________________________________________ >> freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list >> https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions >> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >> -- ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++