Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.carno.net.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!lucy.swin.edu.au!news.rmit.EDU.AU!news.unimelb.EDU.AU!munnari.OZ.AU!news.ecn.uoknor.edu!news.wildstar.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!nntp.portal.ca!news.bc.net!news.maxwell.syr.edu!worldnet.att.net!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!panix!news.panix.com!not-for-mail From: tls@panix.com (Thor Lancelot Simon) Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.netbsd.misc,comp.security.unix Subject: Re: OpenBSD hides security fixes (and blindly integrates code) Date: 17 Feb 1997 00:15:55 -0500 Organization: Panix Lines: 39 Message-ID: <5e8pib$k2c@panix2.panix.com> References: <none-ya023480001912962244220001@news.infi.net> <5e6o39$6am@news.pacifier.com> <5e8cf4$83s@panix2.panix.com> <5e8kp0$lgo@news.pacifier.com> Reply-To: tls@rek.tjls.com NNTP-Posting-Host: panix2.panix.com Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.unix.bsd.netbsd.misc:5448 comp.security.unix:31878 In article <5e8kp0$lgo@news.pacifier.com>, Jason Downs <downsj@threadway.teeny.org> wrote: >In article <5e8cf4$83s@panix2.panix.com>, >Thor Lancelot Simon <tls@rek.tjls.com> wrote: >]In article <5e6o39$6am@news.pacifier.com>, >]Jason Downs <downsj@threadway.teeny.org> wrote: >]>In article <5e6mjn$q3n@panix2.panix.com>, >]>Thor Lancelot Simon <tls@rek.tjls.com> wrote: >]]In article <DERAADT.97Feb16012623@zeus.pacifier.com>, >]>]Theo de Raadt <deraadt@theos.com> wrote: >]>]>I'll bet you don't. >]>] >]>]No, he doesn't. Neither do I. In fact, we beat this to death internally, and >]>]I don't really think anyone's glad that it happened. On the other hand, quite >]>]a few people expressed surprise that said #ifndef made it into OpenBSD, since >]>]that pretty clearly indicates that said code was integrated _without anyone >]>]ever even reading it_ -- rather a stunner, for an operating system which >]>]claims to have security as one of its primary goals. >]> >]>So you're saying that in the future NetBSD plans to commit outright security >]>holes to the arch-dependant portions of their tree? >] >]Did I say that? No, I didn't say that. I suggest you stop making things like >]that up, lest you discredit yourself further. > >Hey, I have an idea. Why don't you and the rest of the NetBSD cabal (to use >peter's term) start actually even attempting to respond with some well >thought out argumentation? I think I've lost count of the number of times Because contrary to your evident delusion, nobody's obliged to accept your world-view, to do exactly what you say -- or what you want -- or to pretend that they said "X" when in fact they didn't, just to make it convenient for you to continue with this masturbatory "argumentation". -- This space not left unintentionally unblank. tls@rek.tjls.com $OpenBSD: locore.s,v 1.5 1996/10/30: Blindly integrating source code, $OpenBSD: locore.s,v 1.7 1997/01/24: so you can lose for 8 weeks. "Sleep tight."