4 ms·
FTA >>> We are having to do research by reading other operating systems. Si Intel cooperates with business partners like apple/windows and not with open sourc
by wiz21c 8y ago
FTA
>>> We are having to do research by reading other operating systems.
Si Intel cooperates with business partners like apple/windows and not with open source. Does it mean that Apple and Windows can claim to be more secure because they have access to the information needed to fix Intel's issues ?
- 2trill2spill 8y ago> Does it mean that Apple and Windows can claim to be more secure because they have access to the information needed to fix Intel's issues ? They can claim it, but I would trust a Linux or FreeBSD box over MacOS or Windows anytime even if they get some security info before the open source operating systems.
- wmf 8y agoIntel cooperates with organizations that obey embargoes and don't badmouth their partners in public, like Red Hat, Canonical, and probably the Linux Foundation. Intel does not cooperate with OpenBSD.
- abcdef123xyz123 8y agoOpenBSD has never disobeyed an embargo. Argued for them to be reduced, criticized them, but not disobeyed them.
- DannyBee 8y agoi'm pretty sure this is not true: The most recent example i remember is: https://lobste.rs/s/dwzplh/krack_attacks_breaking_wpa2#c_pbhnfz https://lobste.rs/s/dwzplh/krack_attacks_breaking_wpa2#c_pbh...
- capt8bit 8y agoThis is common misinformation. Even in this case, OpenBSD did not break the embargo. After protesting, they received the permission of the researcher to publish: Note that I wrote and included a suggested diff for OpenBSD already, and that at the time the tentative disclosure deadline was around the end of August. As a compromise, I allowed them to silently patch the vulnerability. (https://www.krackattacks.com/#openbsd https://www.krackattacks.com/#openbsd)
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- swixmix 8y agoI think what you're insinuating is a side effect of the OpenBSD group being open, honest, and congruent to their ethics.
- DannyBee 8y agoWhat he's insinuating is that they agreed to embargos and then repeatedly broke them, claiming it was "better for users". Regardless of whether it is, you should expect the result of that to be that nobody trusts them with embargoes. Which is in fact, what has happened.
- swixmix 8y agoThe KRACK embargo expired as per agreement but I'll partially concede after reading about this OpenSSL accident: https://www.tedunangst.com/flak/post/regarding-embargoes https://www.tedunangst.com/flak/post/regarding-embargoes Google broke an embargo early. https://security.googleblog.com/2018/01/todays-cpu-vulnerability-what-you-need.html https://security.googleblog.com/2018/01/todays-cpu-vulnerabi... EFail embargo was broken. See https://twitter.com/seecurity/status/995964977461776385 https://twitter.com/seecurity/status/995964977461776385 and http://flaked.sockpuppet.org/2018/05/16/a-unified-timeline.html http://flaked.sockpuppet.org/2018/05/16/a-unified-timeline.h... I don't think picking on OpenBSD is the right thing here.
- saas_co_de 8y ago> badmouth a.k.a. truth Linus has "badmouthed" Intel in much harsher and more explicit terms. Linux is just too big for them to get away with trying to smear and slander so they ignore him and move on.
- pkaye 8y agoA lot of these bugs seems to be found by the Google teams and since they are heavy Linux users, I'm sure in many cases they have a solution for Linux before Apple or Microsoft does.
- ars 8y agoI think they mean Linux, not Apple/Windows.