3 ms·

> OpenBSD zealots claiming it's 110% secure because trust me bro Or possibly because it has a good track record. If you'd like to point at actual vulnerabiliti

• maximilianburke 7mo ago
  It's not so much the vulnerabiltiies as that OpenBSD's mitigations often seem targeted towards imaginary issues.
• stackghost 7mo ago
  >Or possibly because it has a good track record. "Only two remote code execution vulns in the default install" isn't saying much, because the default install has essentially no functionality. Similarly, RCE is not the only kind of vuln. Let's just say it is not the mainstream consensus that OpenBSD is meaningfully more secure than an up-to-date linux. This may have been true in 1995, but it's generally acknowledged by people who know what they're talking about that OpenBSD's reputation for security is overstated.
  • yjftsjthsd-h 7mo ago
    > because the default install has essentially no functionality I dunno, it's got a built in HTTP/S web server and everything needed to be VPN or router. > Let's just say it is not the mainstream consensus that OpenBSD is meaningfully more secure than an up-to-date linux. This may have been true in 1995, but it's generally acknowledged by people who know what they're talking about that OpenBSD's reputation for security is overstated. Yes, I've read plenty of vague aspersions that it's totally not as secure as claimed. Since those claims never come with evidence, I'm going with the traditional response: PoC||GTFO.
  • groundzeros2015 7mo ago
    Ok here is one. Pledge is really good and works by default. Unlike cgroups?