Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 22:12:42 -0700 From: "Crist J . Clark" <cjclark@reflexnet.net> To: Laurence Berland <stuyman@confusion.net> Cc: Bill Fumerola <billf@chimesnet.com>, clefevre@citeweb.net, Akbar <Akbar@Aptitude.com.sg>, freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: wats so special about freeBSD? Message-ID: <20000919221242.O367@149.211.6.64.reflexcom.com> In-Reply-To: <39C83CC6.9BCD1F32@confusion.net>; from stuyman@confusion.net on Tue, Sep 19, 2000 at 11:27:50PM -0500 References: <89731E9AF92BD411869200D0B71BB4DC0FC297@ASERVER> <200009191942.e8JJgMc03338@gits.dyndns.org> <20000920001652.U66839@jade.chc-chimes.com> <39C83CC6.9BCD1F32@confusion.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Sep 19, 2000 at 11:27:50PM -0500, Laurence Berland wrote: > I think people tend to assume that because... [snip] > they have done the big code audit, that they are more secure. [snip] > I don't think OpenBSD has much over FreeBSD in terms of quality > of code, but the perception sort of persists because they are always > pushing themselves as security. > > Am I crazy? No, you are not. You partially answered your own question. OpenBSD is considered more secure because, (a) "They have done the big code audit." (You got that one.) (b) They ship a secure default. Not FreeBSD, nor any other open source OS I am aware of, has done (a). FreeBSD sacrifices (b) for having some stuff work "out of the box." I use FreeBSD and it cannot be said FreeBSD is not one of the more secure OSes out there (with the standard caveat, "when properly configured"), but I think OpenBSD has every right to make the claims they do. -- Crist J. Clark cjclark@alum.mit.edu To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000919221242.O367>