J.C. Roberts wrote: > > On Sat, 11 Feb 2006 17:35:58 -0500, Daniel Ouellet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > >J.C. Roberts wrote: > >> As others have pointed out, you simply misunderstood the article and > >> then posted to the list what many people would consider an inflammatory > >> question. This is not the first time where your reading skills have > >> failed to comprehend the meaning of an article and you posted such > >> questions to the list. Don't feel bad about it because you're not the > >> only one. Heck, Dave Feustel is constantly misreading security > stuff and > >> posting questions to the list -and he's an American. ;-) > > > >Outch!!! > > > >Been put in the same boat... (;> > > > >I have some problem at times to understand some stuff too, but this one > >really hurts. Personally I would prefer be called a moron and I have > >been called so at times too. But it was easier to receive. (;> > > > > As I said, you should not feel bad about it. Absolutely *everyone* is in > the same situation facing these communication problems. As difficult as > it may be to imagine, even those who have English as their first > language (langue maternelle) regularly fail to completely understand the > English words they read. > > I have tremendous respect for you and Siju and everyone who tries to > learn multiple languages so they can communicate with other people from > other cultures. It is a very difficult task. Even when you misunderstand > something, you should still be proud of the fact you actually tried to > understand it. Regardless of your results, the *effort* you put into > comprehending deserves respect. > > The things I pointed out to Siju are simply tools to help him get better > results from his efforts. You can consider them leverage since they > allow you to understand more with less effort or you can think of them > like wearing the glasses that bring the things you read into better > focus. > > kind regards, > jcr
This is from an "outsider". Generally I do not run OpenBSD, but I do follow this list. There are people on this list who actually know what they are talking about. >From many years ago, OpenBSD has been willing to take the effort and do what is required to at least head in the direction of what is required to make a secure system. (Long winded and hedged. Notice I didn't say it is secure.) With that, it is safe to assume that all the easy stuff has been done and that most if not all the merely hard stuff has been done. If you need to be secure (actually if there is a faint chance you might need to be secure) you probably need to be aware of OpenBSD. The security of OpenBSD does not come from doing more of what everybody else seems to be doing to try to claim something regarding security. Uber secure, I'll grant that. Secure (without any hedge) probably not, but they are working on it. Some signs. Keeping up with the latest patches. If you are secure, why bother? Secure level -- doesn't make THAT much difference. Now if I want to crack into an OpenBSD installation, seems like the best and fastest way is if I can somehow panic the administrator into installing my trojan while he's thinking he's patching some new-found hole. Fake holes are actually a security threat in themselves. Booby traps are designed to catch boobies. There are a lot of them. Awareness of this even works to secure Windows (kinda sorta) I don't think you can secure anything so you do not need to be aware. You can baby-proof rooms in a house (somewhat) I don't think it works to baby-proof the internet. (Babies ten to put everything in their mouths) The latest "sky is falling" tends to be received a bit differently here. (But there is a faint possibility that there really is something real and this is the only sign, so responses are a bit hedged) Proactive does not mean keeping up with the latest patches. Probably the main thing is that OpenBSD did not get to where it is now by doing stuff that was easy, or expedient, or "popular". Actually it seems to be a friendly place (I haven't been run off yet) but for people who are willing to actually work at whatever as opposed to people who want it done for them. Something to realize is that the OpenBSD folks have their own OS, designed and implemented according to their own priorities. They do not have to listen to anybody else's ideas as to what their priorities should be. This is something you cannot buy. I don't think anybody else has such or could afford it. They are blunt and brutally honest. Few others can afford to be. (Guess why I lurk here)
