Re: Why can't OpenBSD's securelevels be saved?! - BSD

This is a discussion on Re: Why can't OpenBSD's securelevels be saved?! - BSD ; Anonyma wrote: > *** Also notice that NetBSD was found to be immune to the problems. Manuel wrote: > http://archives.neohapsis.com/archiv...6-01/1914.html >"This was fixed in, for instance, NetBSD by disallowing mounts;" >Wow! >Manuel Simple , yes. And NetBSD's reputation increased favorably ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 2 of 2

Thread: Re: Why can't OpenBSD's securelevels be saved?!

  1. Re: Why can't OpenBSD's securelevels be saved?!

    Anonyma wrote:

    > *** Also notice that NetBSD was found to be immune to the problems.


    Manuel wrote:

    >http://archives.neohapsis.com/archiv...6-01/1914.html


    >"This was fixed in, for instance, NetBSD by disallowing mounts;"


    >Wow!
    >Manuel





    Simple , yes. And NetBSD's reputation increased favorably as a result
    of THEIR proactive solution to the problem.



    ...while OpenBSD's reputation , and it's perception by the public generally ,
    suffered.


    NetBSD 1

    OpenBSD 0


    Regards , An Odd User.


  2. Re: Why can't OpenBSD's securelevels be saved?!

    Anonyma wrote:
    > Anonyma wrote:
    >> *** Also notice that NetBSD was found to be immune to the problems.

    > Manuel wrote:
    >>http://archives.neohapsis.com/archiv...6-01/1914.html
    >>"This was fixed in, for instance, NetBSD by disallowing mounts;"

    >
    > Simple , yes. And NetBSD's reputation increased favorably as a result
    > of THEIR proactive solution to the problem.


    > ..while OpenBSD's reputation , and it's perception by the public generally ,
    > suffered.
    >
    > NetBSD 1
    > OpenBSD 0


    While those of us who actually knew what we were doing were astounded
    that people who had apparently failed to RTFM made such a stink about
    it.

    Can we drop this topic now, please?

    Joachim

+ Reply to Thread