Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

OpenBSD 3.3 Pre-Orders Available

Posted by michael on from the be-a-good-consumer dept.

CoryBenny writes "The OpenBSD project has just started taking pre-orders for its 3.3 release. This release contains the new pro-police stack protection and lots of other new features! The OpenBSD Journal are running a story here. Pre-orders can be made here and just check out their cool new t-shirts!!"

36 comments

  1. OpenBSD is getting better and better... by vwpau227 · · Score: 1

    I started running OpenBSD on my some of my servers about two years ago, and I like the fact that I don't have to go around hunting for patches all the time to continue securing the systems.

    This is, of course, directly contrary to the experience I am now having Windows 2000-based systems (which are running SQL Server 2000) that I help manage, where over the last few weeks I had more patches to put on the system then I could remember, with the associated reboots and downtime as well.

    I look forward to the increased stability and security the new stack protection offers, and hope that the OpenBSD team will continue to make the system better and better, and more and more secure. Keep up the good work.. you have my support!

    --
    These are the good old days you'll be telling your children about. Make them worthwhile.
    1. Re:OpenBSD is getting better and better... by mcgroarty · · Score: 3, Insightful
      I look forward to the increased stability and security the new stack protection offers

      I think you'll enjoy a whole lot more security, but I wouldn't be surprised if the stack protection ended up costing a little stability for a while. The stack protection reveals a whole lot of "usually harmless" bugs in other projects, and until this excellent tool is in more users' hands, OpenBSD users may have to bear the burden of discovery for a while.

      I wouldn't rush to be the first to put the new release on a critical server machine, but if you're a user who wants to give something back, then now's an excellent time. Get current on OpenBSD, see if any of your favorite apps show stack violations, and let the authors of those apps know ASAP!

    2. Re:OpenBSD is getting better and better... by Geekboy(Wizard) · · Score: 4, Interesting

      No. That's why they imported the stack protection right after 3.2 was released. I've tested the stack protections, and while I have to admit there were some bumpy times at first, it has been rock solid for about 3-4 months now. i386 has had little to no problems, the vast majority of the issues have been with the macppc platform, and sparc64 systems. (Mostly because the author didn't have those systems avaliable when he wrote ProPolice.

    3. Re:OpenBSD is getting better and better... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny
      This is, of course, directly contrary to the experience I am now having Windows 2000-based systems

      It's pretty ridiculous to compare the two. OpenBSD is intended to secure your data and networks. Windows 2000 is intended to secure your employment by making you indespensible. Apples and oranges.

      • Afraid of getting laid off? Facing budget cuts? Deploy Windows. (I also recommend Exchange and Outlook.)
      • Self-employed or otherwise a major stockholder? Are you personally held responsible for successes and failures? Deploy OpenBSD.
      Use the right tool for the job.
    4. Re:OpenBSD is getting better and better... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OpenBSD IS getting better, it's a lot less ghey than it used to be. It has a long way to go before it can be used by heterosexual males, though.

  2. It's a conspiracy, I tell you! by ActiveSX · · Score: 1

    Hmm, they have shirts for 3.0, 3.2, and 3.3. What the hell, I really liked the 3.1 artwork. Oh well, bow to Theo's wishes and all that.

    1. Re:It's a conspiracy, I tell you! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree, 3.1's artwork was my favorite. Puff the Barbarian looks darn cool though. I'm definitely buying that shirt.

  3. mmm, t-shirts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Oh, they make an OS too?

  4. It can't be as good as Linux! by Eneff · · Score: 1

    After all, it's only up to 3.3!

    Seriously, I'm sure it will turn out to be a great release, but I'll wait just a little bit.

    1. Re:It can't be as good as Linux! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And linux is up to 2.4 (Linux is a Kernel, not a distro), so what's you're point?

    2. Re:It can't be as good as Linux! by irc.goatse.cx+troll · · Score: 1

      And anyone comparing Operating Systems by version number alone obviously would be too stupid to care. Hence the humour. Also, OpenBSD is both a kernel and an Operating System, So why do you assume he was only comparing kernel versions?

      --
      Pain lasts, kid. Its how you know you're alive. Sometimes I think this growing up thing is just pain management-TheMaxx
  5. Hmmm, I might just try it now... by djcapelis · · Score: 1

    The new stack protection is making me seriously consider openBSD. I've looked at it for awhile, I haven't used it because I've been concerned about the lack of availablity of different patches for the kernel. I use grsecurity for my kernels, but now that they have the major feature I enjoy from grsecurity (the stack protection) I think I'll have to give it a try. I've heard about binary compatibility with linux, how far does this go? Anyone able to shed a little insight for me on how well this works?

    --
    I touch computers in naughty places
    1. Re:Hmmm, I might just try it now... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      The stack protection only works on architectures that support it. Like Sparc. x86 doesn't.


      Binary compatability with linux works for most everything, and even runs linux binaries slightly faster than native.

    2. Re:Hmmm, I might just try it now... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're wrong. x86 does support stack protection, but in a slightly different manner. I can't recall the exact details, but it has to do with only being able to protect part of the stack. Still, better than nothing.

  6. Alpha is Dying by evilviper · · Score: 1, Informative

    OpenBSD confirms, the Alpha is dying... Alpha is no t included on the OpenBSD 3.3 CDs, as it was on every previous set of CDs released.

    --
    Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
  7. OpenBSD Rocks by spoonist · · Score: 1

    You want to hear a story about confidence in your system?

    I ran an internal OpenBSD web server / CVS repository / Slashdot-like chat area. It was on an old Sparc20 I scrounged up.

    I got the opportunity to travel, for four months, to literally the exact opposite side of the planet earth from where I live. What did I do with my server?

    I didn't do anything! I packed my bags and took off! Did I give anyone root? Nope. Did I give anyone instructions on what to do? Nope. Did I get a backup sysadmin? Nope.

    Why not?

    Confidence. I didn't worry about leaving my server for four months while I took off for the opposite side of the planet.

    When I came back four months later, the system was still running perfectly. No problems at all. None. In fact, I left it running for a few months more (until I did an upgrade).

    OpenBSD rocks.

    Check it out. It will rock your world. OpenBSD reminds me of the simpler days of Linux (5-8yrs ago), but has all the latest features and apps.

    1. Re:OpenBSD Rocks by MaoTse · · Score: 1

      Did you really ?

      Seems like a pretty rocket science to me.

      Except I can do the same thing with my slackware boxes (boxen if you prefer). And I have some boxes with much more then 1 CPU.

      Cheers

    2. Re:OpenBSD Rocks by bluGill · · Score: 1

      What if the hardware had failed? Linux can be made that stable (though it is more likely to be vulnerable to crackers...) but harddrives are still mechanical and crash randomly from time to time. You go luckly that time, but what about next trip?

      Sure you can go with RAID and the like, but even still you need provisions for dealing with broken hardware. OpenBSD doen'st run when there is no harddrive.

    3. Re:OpenBSD Rocks by F2F · · Score: 1

      whenever i see a post like yours i'm always reminded of an old firewall we had:

      bash-2.03$ uname -a
      OpenBSD sucky 2.6 GENERIC#696 i386
      bash-2.03$ uptime
      8:28PM up 485 days, 20:12, 2 users, load averages: 0.08, 0.08, 0.08
      bash-2.03$ ifconfig -A | grep inet | wc -l
      37

      all this in 8 megs of ram, 500mb hard drive (which turned out to have died long ago when we rebooted the box to take it away on its 500th day of uptime) and handled web traffic and redirection with up to 3gb outgoing traffic a day...

    4. Re:OpenBSD Rocks by MaoTse · · Score: 1

      That's intersting.

      What kind of interfaces are those ?

      How many aliases ?

    5. Re:OpenBSD Rocks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      those are just aliases. the machine had only three hardware interfaces, and one of them had roughly between 35 and 100 aliases (depending on configuration)...

    6. Re:OpenBSD Rocks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gosh, my Debian Linux server has uptime in the months and gets security updates automagicly with apt-get + cron. I guess I'm just as good as OpenBSD. Yawn.

  8. So what by vesamies · · Score: 1

    There is no SMP because they have no resources to do it. Of course the their system is approaching stone age because they are working on security of an ancient system. Some people seem to like that, while others need all latest and greatest stuff, but this system is not for them. There is no need for innovation. In open source everything is a copy of already existing stuff. Conclusion: you must love traditional stuff and be totally freaked out about security. That is the target market. Of course, your super computer needs something else...

    1. Re:So what by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is no SMP because they have no resources to do it. Of course the their system is approaching stone age because they are working on security of an ancient system. Some people seem to like that, while others need all latest and greatest stuff, but this system is not for them.

      So SMP is not a priority, but supporting new architectures is! They want to support UltraSparcIII and just recently started porting OpenBSD to x86-64 (they received 2 Hammer machines from AMD this week).

    2. Re:So what by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Of course the their system is approaching stone age because they are working on security of an ancient system."

      Get real, how important is security vs. SMP?

      In a lot of environments and for a lot of tasks, security (and stability) are more important than another 50% speed which you get in 6 months due to Moore's law anyway.

      If you've ever coded SMP applications, you know how hard eliminating all possible sources of race conditions, and thus bugs, and thus security holes are. Not putting in SMP support until you are damn sure you know what you are doing seems like a very sensible strategy for a security-focused free UNIX distribution.

      If I wanted SMP with so-so security, I'd run Linux (which I do on a LAN filesharing box). But for my external webservers? OpenBSD, thanks.

  9. Re:*BSD is dying by 'cool+mode'+spook · · Score: 1

    I'm confused. Just how is it that a piece of software can 'die'? I was under the impression that software was not 'alive' to begin with.

  10. YOU ARE A FUCKING DUMBASS NIGGER! SUCK ON MY COCK! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    YHBT! YHL! HAND!

  11. Re:Attitude by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bleh, I've been subscribed to misc@ and tech@ for a while now and I've never seen insults, rants or trolls. Most of the questions get answered professionally and quickly, unless it's in the FAQ, in which case the user is politely notified of this.

    YOU SILLY TROLL, *THWACK*!

  12. Re:Tsarkon Reports - openbsd problems, no SMP, et by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And I thought Linus stole the idea of Linux from Minix, even though the code were different

  13. Linux Binary Compatibility by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I was going to summarize it for you, but I couldn't do better than the compat_linux(8)

    Manpage
    http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/man.cgi?query=compa t_linux&sektion=8

    So basically it works really well for anything that doesn't over use linux specific access of the hardware, especial procfs.

  14. You want interracial faggotry committed on you? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You like the dark meat?