> I'm not sure..I've been wandering through the openbsd source tree and merging
> useful diffs from binaries, but I haven't been too organised about it so far,
> and haven't encountered much in the way of "important" fixes. I'm sure there
> are some, though.
While it can rightfully be said that Op
> What make OpenBSD so "secure" ? Or can this kind of security be
> reproduced with FreeBSD ports ? I think of tools like:
It's not the tools but the amount of time supposedly invested in
improving security. I say "supposedly" because a lot of the buffer
overflow issues they've dealt with haven't
On Sun, 23 May 1999, Warner Losh wrote:
> In message
>
> Kris Kennaway writes:
> : One of my plans is to merge all of these changes into our tree
> : (along with all the other minor changes/manpage corrections, etc).
>
> Which ones are currently missing?
I'm not sure..I've been wandering thro
In message
Kris
Kennaway writes:
: One of my plans is to merge all of these changes into our tree
: (along with all the other minor changes/manpage corrections, etc).
Which ones are currently missing?
Also, beware. Most of the patches will not come into the FreeBSD tree
w/o some tweaking to
| One of my plans is to merge all of these changes into our tree (along with all
| the other minor changes/manpage corrections, etc).
|
| Longer term, I'd like to work on porting some of their kernel code like
| randomized sin_port selection and TCP initial sequence numbering, probably
| hidden b
On Sun, 23 May 1999 sth...@nethelp.no wrote:
> > The OpenBSD team does a lot wrt auditing of the complete sourcetree, but
> > then the question is: is this valid concern or is this pure paranoia.
> > OpenBSD does a lot of valid changes but borders (and sometimes crosses thta
> > border) on paranoi
On 23-May-99 sth...@nethelp.no wrote:
>> The OpenBSD team does a lot wrt auditing of the complete sourcetree, but
>> then the question is: is this valid concern or is this pure paranoia.
>> OpenBSD does a lot of valid changes but borders (and sometimes crosses
>> that border) on paranoia, wrt code.
> The OpenBSD team does a lot wrt auditing of the complete sourcetree, but
> then the question is: is this valid concern or is this pure paranoia.
> OpenBSD does a lot of valid changes but borders (and sometimes crosses thta
> border) on paranoia, wrt code.
Given the number of postings to BUGTRAQ
Hi Andreas =)
On 23-May-99 Andreas Klemm wrote:
> Am currently discussing FreeBSD vs. OpenBSD in private e-mail.
>
> What make OpenBSD so "secure" ? Or can this kind of security be
> reproduced with FreeBSD ports ? I think of tools like:
Ye missed one of the most important things: auditing of th
9 matches
Mail list logo
