On Fri, Jan 18, 2008 at 01:03:07AM +0100, Rico Secada wrote: > On Thu, 17 Jan 2008 18:17:54 -0500 > "Douglas A. Tutty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Thu, Jan 17, 2008 at 05:11:53PM -0500, STeve Andre' wrote: > > > On Thursday 17 January 2008 03:42:38 pm Douglas A. Tutty wrote: > > > > I have a box that I want to keep as secure as I can but I also > > > > need to be able to use a graphical browser from it (I know that > > > > this is a trade-off). > > > > > > > > There is no graphical browser in base. I don't need or want this > > > > browser to do javascript or flash (I have a different box for > > > > entertainment). Of the browsers in packages, which browser would > > > > people think is likely the most secure? > > > [snip] > > > > > > Why not create an OpenBSD live CD with the stuff you want on it? > > > > Because this box will also be my main server. For details, see a > > previous thread (I forget the title) where I'm splitting things > > between a "secure" box where anything confidential will be kept, and > > an "entertainment" box for regular browsing with javascript and, where > > required, flash. Also for watching DVDs and listening to music. > > A main server where you need a graphical browser? I am sorry, but why > don't you just use your entertainment box rather than browsing graphics > from your server?
Because the entertainment box is downstairs whereas my other box (a P-II right now) is accessible from upstairs. If the results of this thread are that a big browser e.g. Konqueror is most likely to be the most secure, then that doesn't run directly on my P-II (not enough memory). I could have it installed on the server and run it via ssh from my P-II access box. Also, I would want to do any online banking with a secure browser from a secure box (see previous threads related to this). Doug.
