3 ms·

> I'm sorry, what? What kind of nonsense distinction is this? > Are you trying to very disingenuously try and claim only kernel exploits count as attacks again

> I'm sorry, what? What kind of nonsense distinction is this? > Are you trying to very disingenuously try and claim only kernel exploits count as attacks against OpenBSD? Not at all. I clearly underlined that I'm not looking for cases fitting that specific scenario. The only moving of goalposts is entirely on your behalf by very disingenously misrepresenting my question in a poor attempt to try make your answer or whatever point fit. And on top of that, the tasteless pretending to be baffled...

DEADMINCE 2y ago
> Not at all. I clearly underlined that I'm not looking for cases fitting that specific scenario The thing is, we're trying to talk about the security of OpenBSD compared to its competition. But you're trying to avoid letting anyone do that by saying only an attack against something in the default install you can do with a user account counts, which is absolutely ridiculous. I'm not moving the goalposts nor am I pretending in any sense. Your approach just doesn't make sense, measure or indicate anything useful or relevant about the security of OpenBSD. I stated so and explained why. But hey, keep believing whatever you want buddy.
- daneel_w 2y ago
  > "The thing is, we're trying to talk about the security of OpenBSD compared to its competition." > "But you're trying to avoid letting anyone do that by saying only an attack against something in the default install you can do with a user account counts, which is absolutely ridiculous." I don't know who "we" are. The question I asked another poster, where you decided to butt in, regarded escalation from an unprivileged position and nothing else. Nobody but yourself said anything along the lines of "only attacks against things in the default install 'count'", nor drew drew up comparisons against "the competition". You clearly have some larger axe to grind, but you're doing it in a discourse playing out only in your head, without reading what others actually wrote.
  - DEADMINCE 2y ago
    > I don't know who "we" are. We are the people having this discussion. That should be obvious. It's kind of funny you accused me of pretending to be baffled, lol. The irony. You certainly had no issue discussing this top with me until I called out your claims/methodology as nonsense. > The question I asked another poster, where you decided to butt in, Welcome to the Internet! > regarded escalation from an unprivileged position and nothing else. Yes. And I pointed out why this is an absolutely nonsense approach. You realize getting root on OpenBSD is significantly easier than several other setups or Linux distro's you've probably never heard of, though, right? So, what is it? Afraid to be wrong? You brought too much into the OpenBSD marketing, so now it's a sunk cost for your ego? > Nobody but yourself said anything along the lines of "only attacks against things in the default install 'count'", nor drew drew up comparisons against "the competition". This is exactly what you imply when you want to limit attacks to LPE's that require a user account, lol. > You clearly have some larger axe to grind, but you're doing it in a discourse playing out only in your head, without reading what others actually wrote. No axe to grind. Just calling out bad claims and reasoning. Even now, you've successfully got us discussing semantics and nonsense instead of you actually addressing the bs claims you made. Stellar job.
    - medguru 2y ago
      Not sure if you reflect at all over your own texts. You come off as projecting, incoherent and cognitively dissonant.
      - dang 2y ago
        Please don't respond to a bad comment by breaking the site guidelines yourself. That only makes things worse. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
    - dang 2y ago
      You've been posting huge numbers of flamewar comments lately. That's not what HN is for, and destroys what it is for. If you keep this up, we're going to have to ban you. I don't want to do that, so if you'd please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules from now on, we'd appreciate it. By the time a commenter gets to violating the site guidelines as egregiously as this, it's almost always the case that they should have stopped posting a lot sooner.

DEADMINCE 2y ago

> Not at all. I clearly underlined that I'm not looking for cases fitting that specific scenario The thing is, we're trying to talk about the security of OpenBSD compared to its competition. But you're trying to avoid letting anyone do that by saying only an attack against something in the default install you can do with a user account counts, which is absolutely ridiculous. I'm not moving the goalposts nor am I pretending in any sense. Your approach just doesn't make sense, measure or indicate anything useful or relevant about the security of OpenBSD. I stated so and explained why. But hey, keep believing whatever you want buddy.

daneel_w 2y ago
> "The thing is, we're trying to talk about the security of OpenBSD compared to its competition." > "But you're trying to avoid letting anyone do that by saying only an attack against something in the default install you can do with a user account counts, which is absolutely ridiculous." I don't know who "we" are. The question I asked another poster, where you decided to butt in, regarded escalation from an unprivileged position and nothing else. Nobody but yourself said anything along the lines of "only attacks against things in the default install 'count'", nor drew drew up comparisons against "the competition". You clearly have some larger axe to grind, but you're doing it in a discourse playing out only in your head, without reading what others actually wrote.
- DEADMINCE 2y ago
  > I don't know who "we" are. We are the people having this discussion. That should be obvious. It's kind of funny you accused me of pretending to be baffled, lol. The irony. You certainly had no issue discussing this top with me until I called out your claims/methodology as nonsense. > The question I asked another poster, where you decided to butt in, Welcome to the Internet! > regarded escalation from an unprivileged position and nothing else. Yes. And I pointed out why this is an absolutely nonsense approach. You realize getting root on OpenBSD is significantly easier than several other setups or Linux distro's you've probably never heard of, though, right? So, what is it? Afraid to be wrong? You brought too much into the OpenBSD marketing, so now it's a sunk cost for your ego? > Nobody but yourself said anything along the lines of "only attacks against things in the default install 'count'", nor drew drew up comparisons against "the competition". This is exactly what you imply when you want to limit attacks to LPE's that require a user account, lol. > You clearly have some larger axe to grind, but you're doing it in a discourse playing out only in your head, without reading what others actually wrote. No axe to grind. Just calling out bad claims and reasoning. Even now, you've successfully got us discussing semantics and nonsense instead of you actually addressing the bs claims you made. Stellar job.
  - medguru 2y ago
    Not sure if you reflect at all over your own texts. You come off as projecting, incoherent and cognitively dissonant.
    - dang 2y ago
      Please don't respond to a bad comment by breaking the site guidelines yourself. That only makes things worse. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
  - dang 2y ago
    You've been posting huge numbers of flamewar comments lately. That's not what HN is for, and destroys what it is for. If you keep this up, we're going to have to ban you. I don't want to do that, so if you'd please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules from now on, we'd appreciate it. By the time a commenter gets to violating the site guidelines as egregiously as this, it's almost always the case that they should have stopped posting a lot sooner.