Slashdot Mirror
OpenBSD 4.5 Released
portscan writes "OpenBSD 4.5 has been released. New and extended platforms include sparc64, and added device drivers. OpenSSH 5.2 is included, plus a number of tweaks, bugfixes, and enhancements. See the announcement page for a full list. OpenBSD is a security-oriented UNIX/BSD operating system." As per OpenBSD tradition, of course there's a song.
Oh BSD for server farms,
For blinking rows of lights.
For late night coke and deli runs
In those bitter winter nights!
NetBSD! FreeBSD!
Dick shakes his fists at thee
And hates much more the fact that you're
As dead as dead can be!
Title says it all: http://www.sun.com/software/solaris/get.jsp
#include <sig.h>
NetBSD 5 yesterday, OpenBSD 4.5 today and a three day weekend ahead.
*fap*
Stop Computers/Cars Analogies on S
It's a spectrum, and not all OSes are good for all applications. I for one am glad that there are people taking security seriously in an OS. Maybe it's hard to use for the average user, but in server and embedded environments, it excels.
You can also bet that other *nixes (especially other BSD flavors) take hints on how to secure themselves from OpenBSD.
Use whatever OS suits your needs best, just don't try to bring other distros down for not following your vision.
The one area where OpenBSD is let down on the security front is the packages/ports - basically the applications you might want to use. Those are not kept updated over the lifetime of a release. The only way to get the patches and security fixes is to run -Current, which may not be the best for most people.
Given the frequent updates needed for some apps, especially on the security front (looking at you Firefox!) - it seems a bit odd for a security focused project to expect it's users to run the same old static version for circa 6 months till the next version arrives.
I don't think that there are many people out there that would claim that OpenBSD is comfortable to use and would make a good desktop system.
But it has its small niche market and lives there happily. Additionally we all benefit from this project one way or the other (OpenSSH, etc.)
It's a bit similar to Minix: interesting and certainly helpful in its own way. But nothing for everyday usage.
Is this to the tune of 'O Caaaanada'?
I don't think that there are many people out there that would claim that OpenBSD is comfortable to use and would make a good desktop system.
You might be surprised. OpenBSD has good ACPI support now, has DRI in 4.5 (had it in 4.4 but it wasn't enabled by default). Sound support is good, and 4.5 introduces a simple sound daemon for userspace mixing. ARM support has also improved a lot recently, so it makes a good choice for handhelds.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
It's totally unlike MINIX. MINIX is a hobby OS that only works and has perfect security in the author's mind. OpenBSD is used in production where security matters and on real hardware.
I am willing to claim that OpenBSD is more than comfortable for its intended use in routers and servers.
OpenBSD doesn't use GUI config tools, and complex package managers, but that is because they are not needed. It is simple and elegant like that.
It has some rough edges like the lack of utf-8 support in the base system and utilities but it isn't bad as a Desktop OS either, most desktop applications don't use libc for their encoding support anyways.
My home server and my laptop both run OpenBSD and I don't miss your real OSes at all. After all whatever I cannot do easily in OpenBSD Linux does through binary blobs and proprietary software. At that point I could be as well running Windows 7.
10 little-endian boys went out to dine, a big-endian carp ate one, and then there were -246.
A version of KDE that no longer gets any love from upstream; old Firefox, old Thunderbird. Hopefully there are security updates for the latter two and that someone is giving some TLC to the former.
I would beg to differ. The package management is just as good if not better than what's available in Linuxland, so there's no great difficulty in setting it up as a good desktop system.
Having excellent support for many non-x86 platforms, as well as having a small footprint make it a great choice for older hardware. I currently have it installed on on my old UltraSparc and Alpha workstations.
OpenBSD contributes more than just OpenSSH to other OS'es. Aside from pushing hardware manufacturers to open up their documentation, they've also reverse engineered drivers that have made their way into the other BSD's and even Linux (remember the whole Atheros? issue last year). Whereas many Linux distributions and the other BSD's have made compromises with proprietary drivers and binary blobs, OpenBSD still pushes for true open source.
PF and CARP also make OpenBSD a superior router platform to any IPTables based setup any day. You may be surprised how popular it is in the data centre.
Unlike Minix, OpenBSD's niche has a place in real world usage.
http://astutehosting.com/
I don't think that there are many people out there that would claim that OpenBSD is comfortable to use and would make a good desktop system.
Depends on what you mean by a desktop. I run ubuntu on my laptops but I have an amd64 machine running netbsd for serious work. I use it for network administration and software development. The environment is simple: X11, fvwm, aterm and applications like firefox and nedit. Its not gnome, but for some purposes it is much better. I haven't used openbsd at all but I am pretty sure it would be similar on the same hardware.
http://michaelsmith.id.au
Not on the level of binary compatibility, no.
Error: password can't contain reverse spelling of ancient Chinese emperor
A default OpenBSD install includes OpenSSH open on port 22. I assure you there is no shortage of script kiddies looking for exploits in OpenBSD. And even more trying to exploit OpenSSH. Usually they are able to escalate privileges from root to root using a bug in grep from a version released 5 years ago and then they give up.
Yep. GPL talks the talk, but BSD walks the walk. Thanks and congratulations to all the BSD contributors throughout the years. This is a more FREE world thanks to your time and efforts.
Do you even lift?
These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.
isn't UNIX a standard?
"It's a Unix system ! I know this !"
Squirrel!
You might be able to. OpenBSD can run Linux binaries, although may not support some recent system calls. If you're using ext2/3 then OpenBSD should be able to mount it correctly. I don't think anyone's done this as a drop-in job, and I can't imagine many people wanting to (a large part of the attraction of OpenBSD is the clean and consistent, well-documented, userland. Replacing this with the cobbled-together userland from Ubuntu would not be an improvement). You can, however, install most of the software you would run on Ubuntu on OpenBSD.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
The package management is just as good if not better than what's available in Linuxland,
When's the last time you used Linux? Keeping systems up-to-date, both base system and userspace stuff, is much easier on Debian-based systems, IMO. It's straightforward on the BSDs, yes. But I wouldn't call it better. In fact, when I do setup an OpenBSD systems, I normally end up using pkgsrc over OpenBSD ports.
so there's no great difficulty in setting it up as a good desktop system.
No, there's not. But even a Windows-only imbecile can get Ubuntu with GNOME running in less than an hour, and I don't think you can say that about any of the BSD systems.
Don't get me wrong, I prefer NetBSD and OpenBSD to pretty much everything else out there, but it's still not for beginners.
A version of KDE that no longer gets any love from upstream; old Firefox, old Thunderbird. Hopefully there are security updates for the latter two and that someone is giving some TLC to the former.
OpenBSD is on a 6-month development release, and remember the auditing and code-screening that goes into each release. Patches for these "optional" packages (OBSD default install primary use is a stripped down server environment) can be updated immediately. Just like any other installer, there WILL be updates available, even on day 1.
Is the lack of RBAC and MAC, or any decent non discretionary access controls.
Solaris has RBAC, Linux has RSBAC and SELinux. OpenBSD staunchly refuses to add anything similar, and no, a system call interceptor does not count.
It's all well and good to have quality code and aim to get rid of vulnerabilities at the core, but a really secure system would be able to protect from attack, in the event it did happen.
As it stands, a system with SELinux or RSBAC is far, far more secure than OpenBSD, because of this fact.
If you ignore ACs because they are anonymous - you're an idiot.
"I find it intimidating that the community is unable or unwilling to maintain proper information channels for security-related maintenance"
You could try looking over on the Bug Tracking System or the openbsd-bugs mailing list
davecb5620@gmail.com
"The one area where OpenBSD is let down on the security front is the packages/ports"
"The ports & packages collection does NOT go through the thorough security audit that the OpenBSD base system does. Although we strive to keep the quality of the packages collection high, we just do not have enough human resources to ensure the same level of robustness and security"
davecb5620@gmail.com
kLOC == Popularity.
That does not necessarily mean that GPL is the right solution for all open-source software, and please don't suggest otherwise. Each project determines which license is right for them.
Security is something we should get on top of the other features, not with the cost of other features. I am talking about usability and features here.
Security is not a feature. Thinking it is has led to most of the Internet's larger failings as present today.
Interested in open source engine management for your Subaru?
Except that - as someone pointed out in an earlier comment - the optional packages like Firefox and KDE don't get the auditing and code screening. Hell, allegedly they don't even get prompt security updates when upstream fixes something.
Keeping systems up-to-date, both base system and userspace stuff, is much easier on Debian-based systems, IMO.
I upgraded to 4.5 this morning, and the package upgrade instructions were to run pkg_add -ui -F update -F updatedepends. Now, I'm typing this on Ubuntu, and I use FreeBSD on most of "my" servers, but that just about as convenient as it gets.
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
That's a bad example - Apache is shipped as part of the core OpenBSD system and therefore a hole in Apache as shipped with OpenBSD *would* count.
Oolite: Elite-like game. For Mac, Linux and Windows
Another thing: Theo may be a dick
I have to say that I've never had problems with him or the other OpenBSD maintainers. I'm not part of their "in crowd" by any measure, but everyone's been decent to me when I've had problems or questions.
Bad approach: I can't do $foo. How do I do it?
Good approach: I RTFM about how to do $foo, but step 5 gives different results for me than the man page says it should. What should I try next?
They're busy people, and when I've been respectful of their time, they've been respectful of mine.
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
except that the Apache that comes installed with OpenBSD is far different than the one you'll find on apache.org. Last I heard, there are about 4000 lines of code difference. They maintain that as part of the base. It is more secure than the stock apache you'd find elsewhere.
And this isn't coming from some AC. I've used OpenBSD since 3.4. I've seen the implementation of wireless, bluetooth, WPA/WPA2 without the "linux_supplicant" bullshit. Massive changes to PF, bioctl for raid, sound upgrades, DRI for 3D, OpenBGPd, OpenOSPFd, our own implementation of mail (ripping out the modified sendmail). All without an NDA.
We are the tortoise, not the hare. Linux/FreeBSD are the prison bitches of companies by signing NDAs just so they can "support" the latest technology. Video cards blobs may work, but when they go tits up, the companies either take forever to fix them, or it's just tough luck... "you don't have enough market share"
It's a popularity contest. OpenBSD won't win it, but we don't need to. I am happy to be sitting at the adult table, not eating the table scraps of the corporate world.
It's all damned lies and statistics!! I mean 47% of all people use statistics to back up their arguments.
If the MD5 is different, you shouldn't use it.