3 ms·
I don't see much point in OBSD to be honest. Most of the claims to security are bogus (auditing is great, but it's not a reason to omit actual security features
by Zurrrrr 4y ago
I don't see much point in OBSD to be honest. Most of the claims to security are bogus (auditing is great, but it's not a reason to omit actual security features).
NetBSD has honestly seen much more interesting to me, cleaner tighter code, and some security features that look really interesting to play with.
- anthk 4y agoNetBSD it's a disaster with 2 different X.org's being shipped. I know to do that to support alien platforms, but still difficult to set.
- accrual 4y agoWhich security features are omitted that you would like to see in OpenBSD?
- Zurrrrr 4y agoStuff like KUBSAN, KASAN, KMSAN, KCSAN which detect problems at runtime. There isn't anything even close in other OSs. Something like VeriExec would be nice as well. And while NetBSD doesn't have it either, some type of MAC or RBAC implementation would also be welcome.
- scns 4y agoThere is a study out there, sadly i have no link at hand, where they looked for bugs. Sorted from from least to most bugs found: 1. OpenBSD 2.FreeBSD 3.NetBSD
- Zurrrrr 4y agoI know what you are referring to, iirc it's very out of date now. OpenBSD focuses on auditing to try and remove bugs. This is great. But it also makes sense to prepare for bugs as an eventually since you might not have found them to audit them yet. That's why it makes sense to have stuff to help lock the system down, and OpenBSD is very much lacking in that area.
- aliqot 4y agoThis looks worse on NetBSD than it really is; I'd estimate a lot of this is just the sheer number of devices it can run on and how impossible it is to run clean 100% of the time on 100% of systems.