Privacy only as good as the people taked to enforce it? And how is this news, hmmmm?
I mean, I once heard of a farmer who gave the keys to the henhouse to a fox. And, guess what? The next day: no more chicken! What a surprise!
In other news, people with matches put more things on fire, and war is dangerous business for just about everyone, including puppies and cute little kids.
Before everyone gets on their high horses about this, remember:
1) French companies sued mainly because fake goods were sold on eBay. Selling fake stuff (anywhere, on the net and off) is a big problem for French luxury companies.
2) French companies also sued to prevent people selling real luxury goods at cut prices. This is abusive since it criminalizes legal owners and sellers in order to protect their 'official' resellers. However, eBay has appealed and I am pretty certain this will be struck down by the French courts.
Finally, of course, this leaves the problem of certifying that, let's say a Chanel bag, is the real thing on eBay and not a fake. This could be helped by supplying some sort of authenticity voucher that sellers could produce if asked by eBay.
That would solve the problem: eBay could simply say to a seller "please show us the voucher that says this is the genuine article or pull your offer". Yes, I know, what's to say the seller is not going to produce a fake voucher, but still.
The thing with France right now is that they are trying to combine two things: e-commerce and checking that articles sold are genuine. Not an easy thing to pull off, and these fscking French companies are not taking the right path (suing instead of cooperating). Then again, maybe eBay just refused to cooperate, and they thought suing was the easiest way to obtain results and a more cooperative eBay.
So - as strange as it may seem right now - this could have a positive impact on the quality of eBay auctions. Think about it for a moment, before posting stupid French jokes.
"Fine on fat" has nothing to do with universal health coverage. It has everything to do with bad policy and even worse laws (not to mention stupid lawmakers).
There are tons of countries in the world today with universal health coverage who don't engage in that kind of stupid law making.
Then again, it is mostly accepted these days that being overweight is bad for you, in all kind of different ways, so maybe a tax on fat is not such a bad idea, especially if human fat is recycled into bio-fuel. Fight Club, anyone?
Besides, wait until they apply this law to the sumotori... and the howls of outrage from the sumo-loving japanese public...:-)
I don't know why, but this question sounds really, really weird to me: if you are doing.NET development, why move to Mono and Linux? Why not just stay under Windows, especially since you say (and I quote):
I dont know a lot about Linux, so I thought I would ask if there is already something like this available.
Anyway, here is my suggestion, but, as another poster has already pointed out, any Linux/GUI permutation would probably work just as well:
Some people would argue that using Slackware for this is crazy, but (a) Slackware is a lean and mean developement platform, and a very lean Linux distribution and (b) it will teach you a lot of things about Linux, and UNIX in general.
Of course, it begs the question: How much of our current resources will it take to create/maintain these plants? Of course, if you had read the article, you'd know that these solar plants use no special material, except aluminium. Building and maintaining these thermal solar plants would probably cost a lot less than, say, building equivalent nuclear plants. And, to stay with this example, it would last longer and produce zero radioactive materials.
They should continue, "unfortunately, there are a fair amount of countries that don't have access to the sun. " Which is a pretty ridiculous argument: by definition, all nations and all continents on this earth have access to the sun, even Antarctica. Some nations, due to their geographic position on the globe, simply have better "sunlight" than others. Event then, solar energy is available pretty much all around the world. For instance, one of the most important country in Europe for solar energy is Germany, which is not especially noted for its warm climate...
Before criticizing that type of technology, you really should read the article, you know. You might learn a thing or two.
The Debian maintainers wrote to Theo personally, while the correct email address for OpenSSH problems, issues and bug reports is "openssh@openssh.com".
The result is that the maintainers of OpenSSH were not properly notified, and a bug was left in the code. For all that it's worth, it seems Theo was on holidays, with no access to a computer.
So, sure, it may sound harsh, but I believe it's for a good cause: OpenSSH developers really want a stable and secure software. Consider the announcement a reminder of the proper procedure to warn them of bugs, not a dig at this or that operating system.
Being able to crack the GSM A5/1 encryption with thousands of US dollars (instead of millions) is nice, but the encryption scheme itself was cracked long ago, and by Prof. Shamir (of RSA fame), no less.
First came exotic ports (as if using 922 instead of 22 was security -- it just throws off scripted attacks), then port knocking, and now this ?
Whatever happened to just plain good passwords (including a little helper for good measure), TCPWrappers, sensible firewalling and ssh private/public keys?
I could understand this type of security with more brittle services, things that can be hacked, but this is IMHO going way oervboard.
No, it just lists vulnerabilities. But it also lists them AND presents these two important things: (a) the importance of the vulnerability, and (b) whether or not it can be triggered through the network or not (local/remote vulnerability).
Furthermore, it separates Windows vulnerabilities in system and application vulnerabilities, if memory serves well. It's not able to do that with Linux, since different Linux distros incorporate different applications.
The matrix therefore becomes a lot more complicated. You can have a 'local only' problem (meaning: no remote exploitation) which can be considered as 'critical' on some Linux/BSD systems and not on others. You can have a remotely-exploitable problem which is critical on all systems that have application XYZ installed. But if I don't install XYZ (or if it's not activated by default) on my PC, I don't have a problem. And so on and so forth.
Which is why people that point at Linux/Mac and say: "Aha! More insecure than Windows!!" are not truly honest: I have Linux and OpenBSD machines with up-to-date SSH servers, no users, a good password, and no other network service running. These machines are almost perfectly secure -- except when it comes to an OpenSSH vulnerability -- even though there are plenty of applications on them that could be considered obsolete or vulnerable... if you can gain local access in the first place. The only point of vulnerability is OpenSSH. And I update it religiously.
All in all, don't blame Secunia: blame people (especially journalists) who know nothing about security and jump on meaningless numbers pulled out of thin air to blame Linux.
Based on what I know, they have already forced French ISPs to keep logs of connections. After a number of downloads from well-known sites (The Pirate's Bay comes to mind) they will cut off Internet access after a couple of warning emails. I suspect things like BitTorrent also raise suspicion.
In other words: download something from the Pirate's Bay -- it may be a Linux distro for instance -- leave your machine unattended, don't read your email for a couple of days... And you are cut off.
However, French courts have ruled in the past that the burden of proof rests on the French RIAA (SACEM) so all is not lost. Until they close *that* loophole. *sigh*
This is a bad idea, precisely for the reasons I gave in my previous post: wherever badly-protected wifi is available, you can illegally download content by hiding behind an innocent user. Said innocent user will be left with all the legal troubles. Expect more grannies to be dragged in front of a judge, RIAA-style.
To be honest, I don't care if music is DRM-free in France: I rip the CDs that I bought to MP3 very well without government interference, thank you very much. And most movies come out on DVD 6 months after the theatrical release, anyway.
I don't buy that many CDs and DVDs these days anyway. Most popular entertainment is complete and utter shite. What pisses me off is that private corporations will now be able to sic their lawyers and goons on hapless users. On the other hand, French courts have tended to side (correctly, IMHO) with the users.
One, and one last thing: I pay for 99.9% of my entertainment. The rest is usually released under a free license. Don't assume that I am against this measure just because I am a pirate, Mmmmmkay?
Listen: I live in Paris and I have something like 10 wifi networks right in my building.
It would take me a trivial amount of time to crack the WEP keys of this network.
If I ever wanted to go the illegal download way, that's what I would do: use my neighbours connection. Do you really think the SACEM (French RIAA) will truly investigate who did what on which network? I don't think so. My neighbours would be left with the legal fees, prosecutions, etc, while I would just move on to the next hapless victim^W^W wifi network.
I have expanded at length on this subject on my French blog. Including some language that I will not reproduce here.
In a city where even McDonald's offer free wifi for the price of a cheeseburger (not to mention the schweet municipal wifi project rumored to be in the works), this typically represents what De Gaulle said about the French right-wing politicians: the most stupid in the world.
"According to this article, our good friends at the NSA "may" have put backdoors in some of the technologies that could be used by Skype."
Roll your own, use a publicly available AES implementation, or Rijndael's original cipher. Also, the NSA aren't quite as clever as you think. Pretty good I'm sure, but the level of paranoia about them is nuts.
They are clever enough to introduce trapdoors in something most people never even think of checking. Why? Because they understand the game: in crypto, it does not matter if your software is iron-clad if your random number generator has been compromised. And so on and so forth, all the way down to the bare metal.
Don't underestimate these guys: they have been working on that kind of problem for the past fifty years. Their British counterparts at GCHQ invented public key crypto several years before everybody else. They eat, drink, breathe, and smoke crypto and all kinds of telecom all day long because they are paid to do that. And their research budget is several times the budget of a small country. Paranoid? Sure, call me paranoid if you want, but if there is one organization that would be able to pull it off, it's NSA. And no, they are not interested in your privacy.
There's no reason at all not to be able to do secure comms on windows. And if it's behind NAT then there's no reason that it should be compromised either. Any OS surely has the capability to intercept and record audio from the sound card, but will present different difficulties in gaining access and/or installing the software.
Oh, please. Windows can be cracked, and has been cracked, simply by pointing at a compromised web page. Automated software installation -- totally transparent and invisible to the user -- is trivial. Do a google search on "worm" or "Storm worm" for the latest example. And don't get me started on NAT.
"the Bundespolizei (that's German police to you) may not have the means to decipher your skype communications right now. But it's getting there, thank you very much"
I would dispute this. Unless they can come into your house and gain physical access to your PC whilst you're out.
They don't even need to gain physical access. If they can trick you to a web page that contains a trojan, you are dead meat. Period.
"And there are agencies out there who certainly can, and will."
I don't think so.
You haven't been paying attention to the news, lately, haven't you?
It does not matter if the communication is encrypted and broken down into packets if all that is needed is to intercept the complete communication at one (or both) ends. Under Windows, this can probably be accomplished trivially, since most apps run with administrator privileges under most Windows machines. And, running as a Windows administrator, Skype will alter your firewall configuration. Ooops.
What's more, most Internet packets these days pass through one of the MAE. And guess what? Most telecom companies who run the MAEs have agreed to cooperate with the NSA, including to the point they have built special facilities to allow NSA specialists to install eavesdropping equipment right there.
Finally, if you can intercept let's say 70% of a Skype communication, you probably have enough to determine if Alice and Bob should be put under further surveillance... Or maybe to disrupt their "nefarious" plans.
According to this article, our good friends at the NSA "may" have put backdoors in some of the technologies that could be used by Skype.
And, then, according to this other article, it does not matter what technologies you use, if your CPU is wide open to analysis and crypto attacks.
And, of course, there is the question of using a 'secure' communication system on a completely insecure operating system, such as Windows. Why do you think they talk of intercepting the communication before it becomes encrypted? Probably because the vast majority of suspects use Windows. Using Linux, or MacOS, would not be much of an improvement either.
Conclusion? Well, the Bundespolizei (that's German police to you) may not have the means to decipher your skype communications right now. But it's getting there, thank yo uvery much. And there are agencies out there who certainly can, and will.
And what happened to free german crypto? I thought Germany had the only sane policy about crypto in the industrial world?
Gene Simmons is going to blast college kids for engaging in sex before marriage.
Something like: "Everyone knows stable marriages are the bedrock of civilized society, and stable marriages cannot be created except through abstinence before marriage! College kids these days are out of the f****** minds!!".
Pros: establishes Apple as THE platform for photographers and designers by removing the Windows competition. Sure, Apple could continue to fund the development of Photoshop and Illustrator for Windows. But the latest and greatest version would always appear on the Macintosh first.
Cons: even with its current pile of money (iPhone and Ipod are two very successful products after all), I am not sure Apple has enough money to buy Adobe. Not to mention Microsoft would certainly file an anti-trust suit. It also raises all kind of legal snafus in Europe for instance, which would certainly frown upon it.
Cons: Postscript and PDF are both open standards. I am not sure I'd like to see Apple control their future.
So, yes, and interesting prospect. Still pretty unlikely, though.
2) The license issues are very serious: the BSD licenses allow developers to build on other's work and proprietize it, the GPL insists that it remain available to all customers. That's a big, big deal with the proprietary information and NDA's on new hardware.
I am always amazed when people who know nothing about OpenBSD or licenses talk about them, and simply propagate the received idea: 'BSD Bad, GPL Good'. But, hey, this is Slashdot, right?
OpenBSD indicates all changes to its Ports/Packages on the following page.
If you have configured your OpenBSD machine properly, all that is needed to upgrade an installed package is to enter sudo pkg_add -vv -i -u package_name. No fuss, no muss, and it only takes a few minutes to upgrade all the installed programs to the latest version. No need to read mailing lists or web pages.
Finally, if you can't be bothered to read mailing lists and/or web pages to make sure your system is secure, I don't think you should be using OpenBSD in the first place. Stay with Windows, it's probably where you belong.
Slashdot Mirror
Privacy only as good as the people taked to enforce it? And how is this news, hmmmm?
I mean, I once heard of a farmer who gave the keys to the henhouse to a fox. And, guess what? The next day: no more chicken! What a surprise!
In other news, people with matches put more things on fire, and war is dangerous business for just about everyone, including puppies and cute little kids.
Before everyone gets on their high horses about this, remember:
1) French companies sued mainly because fake goods were sold on eBay. Selling fake stuff (anywhere, on the net and off) is a big problem for French luxury companies.
2) French companies also sued to prevent people selling real luxury goods at cut prices. This is abusive since it criminalizes legal owners and sellers in order to protect their 'official' resellers. However, eBay has appealed and I am pretty certain this will be struck down by the French courts.
Finally, of course, this leaves the problem of certifying that, let's say a Chanel bag, is the real thing on eBay and not a fake. This could be helped by supplying some sort of authenticity voucher that sellers could produce if asked by eBay.
That would solve the problem: eBay could simply say to a seller "please show us the voucher that says this is the genuine article or pull your offer". Yes, I know, what's to say the seller is not going to produce a fake voucher, but still.
The thing with France right now is that they are trying to combine two things: e-commerce and checking that articles sold are genuine. Not an easy thing to pull off, and these fscking French companies are not taking the right path (suing instead of cooperating). Then again, maybe eBay just refused to cooperate, and they thought suing was the easiest way to obtain results and a more cooperative eBay.
So - as strange as it may seem right now - this could have a positive impact on the quality of eBay auctions. Think about it for a moment, before posting stupid French jokes.
"Fine on fat" has nothing to do with universal health coverage. It has everything to do with bad policy and even worse laws (not to mention stupid lawmakers).
There are tons of countries in the world today with universal health coverage who don't engage in that kind of stupid law making.
Then again, it is mostly accepted these days that being overweight is bad for you, in all kind of different ways, so maybe a tax on fat is not such a bad idea, especially if human fat is recycled into bio-fuel. Fight Club, anyone?
Besides, wait until they apply this law to the sumotori... and the howls of outrage from the sumo-loving japanese public... :-)
I dont know a lot about Linux, so I thought I would ask if there is already something like this available.
Anyway, here is my suggestion, but, as another poster has already pointed out, any Linux/GUI permutation would probably work just as well:
Some people would argue that using Slackware for this is crazy, but (a) Slackware is a lean and mean developement platform, and a very lean Linux distribution and (b) it will teach you a lot of things about Linux, and UNIX in general.
I hope this helps!
"Sure, you have got a PhD. Just don't touch anything".
Before criticizing that type of technology, you really should read the article, you know. You might learn a thing or two.
The Debian maintainers wrote to Theo personally, while the correct email address for OpenSSH problems, issues and bug reports is "openssh@openssh.com".
The result is that the maintainers of OpenSSH were not properly notified, and a bug was left in the code. For all that it's worth, it seems Theo was on holidays, with no access to a computer.
So, sure, it may sound harsh, but I believe it's for a good cause: OpenSSH developers really want a stable and secure software. Consider the announcement a reminder of the proper procedure to warn them of bugs, not a dig at this or that operating system.
Being able to crack the GSM A5/1 encryption with thousands of US dollars (instead of millions) is nice, but the encryption scheme itself was cracked long ago, and by Prof. Shamir (of RSA fame), no less.
The MS Product Manager for Vista is named "Nice White".
Let me rephrase this: the ugliest, most user-unfriendly OS out there is managed by a guy named "Nice".
Bada-Bing! Thank you, I'll be here all week. Feel free to mod me down, now.
Quite honestly, if (like me) you are a European, I guess it's time to kick some butt and make Europe more democratic.
Whoever that Commissioner is, I propose we all sack him. With extreme prejudice, if you see what I mean...
OK, this being said, anyone ready to open a petition against this stooopid copyright extension?
First came exotic ports (as if using 922 instead of 22 was security -- it just throws off scripted attacks), then port knocking, and now this ?
Whatever happened to just plain good passwords (including a little helper for good measure), TCPWrappers, sensible firewalling and ssh private/public keys?
I could understand this type of security with more brittle services, things that can be hacked, but this is IMHO going way oervboard.
Does Secunia present slanted information?
No, it just lists vulnerabilities. But it also lists them AND presents these two important things: (a) the importance of the vulnerability, and (b) whether or not it can be triggered through the network or not (local/remote vulnerability).
Furthermore, it separates Windows vulnerabilities in system and application vulnerabilities, if memory serves well. It's not able to do that with Linux, since different Linux distros incorporate different applications.
The matrix therefore becomes a lot more complicated. You can have a 'local only' problem (meaning: no remote exploitation) which can be considered as 'critical' on some Linux/BSD systems and not on others. You can have a remotely-exploitable problem which is critical on all systems that have application XYZ installed. But if I don't install XYZ (or if it's not activated by default) on my PC, I don't have a problem. And so on and so forth.
Which is why people that point at Linux/Mac and say: "Aha! More insecure than Windows!!" are not truly honest: I have Linux and OpenBSD machines with up-to-date SSH servers, no users, a good password, and no other network service running. These machines are almost perfectly secure -- except when it comes to an OpenSSH vulnerability -- even though there are plenty of applications on them that could be considered obsolete or vulnerable... if you can gain local access in the first place. The only point of vulnerability is OpenSSH. And I update it religiously.
All in all, don't blame Secunia: blame people (especially journalists) who know nothing about security and jump on meaningless numbers pulled out of thin air to blame Linux.
Pine = Program for Internet News and Email
Pine = Pine Is Not Elm
Alpine = Apache Licensed Pine
Just so you know...
Based on what I know, they have already forced French ISPs to keep logs of connections. After a number of downloads from well-known sites (The Pirate's Bay comes to mind) they will cut off Internet access after a couple of warning emails. I suspect things like BitTorrent also raise suspicion.
In other words: download something from the Pirate's Bay -- it may be a Linux distro for instance -- leave your machine unattended, don't read your email for a couple of days... And you are cut off.
However, French courts have ruled in the past that the burden of proof rests on the French RIAA (SACEM) so all is not lost. Until they close *that* loophole. *sigh*
This is a bad idea, precisely for the reasons I gave in my previous post: wherever badly-protected wifi is available, you can illegally download content by hiding behind an innocent user. Said innocent user will be left with all the legal troubles. Expect more grannies to be dragged in front of a judge, RIAA-style.
To be honest, I don't care if music is DRM-free in France: I rip the CDs that I bought to MP3 very well without government interference, thank you very much. And most movies come out on DVD 6 months after the theatrical release, anyway.
I don't buy that many CDs and DVDs these days anyway. Most popular entertainment is complete and utter shite. What pisses me off is that private corporations will now be able to sic their lawyers and goons on hapless users. On the other hand, French courts have tended to side (correctly, IMHO) with the users.
One, and one last thing: I pay for 99.9% of my entertainment. The rest is usually released under a free license. Don't assume that I am against this measure just because I am a pirate, Mmmmmkay?
Listen: I live in Paris and I have something like 10 wifi networks right in my building.
It would take me a trivial amount of time to crack the WEP keys of this network.
If I ever wanted to go the illegal download way, that's what I would do: use my neighbours connection. Do you really think the SACEM (French RIAA) will truly investigate who did what on which network? I don't think so. My neighbours would be left with the legal fees, prosecutions, etc, while I would just move on to the next hapless victim^W^W wifi network.
I have expanded at length on this subject on my French blog. Including some language that I will not reproduce here.
In a city where even McDonald's offer free wifi for the price of a cheeseburger (not to mention the schweet municipal wifi project rumored to be in the works), this typically represents what De Gaulle said about the French right-wing politicians: the most stupid in the world.
They are clever enough to introduce trapdoors in something most people never even think of checking. Why? Because they understand the game: in crypto, it does not matter if your software is iron-clad if your random number generator has been compromised. And so on and so forth, all the way down to the bare metal.
Don't underestimate these guys: they have been working on that kind of problem for the past fifty years. Their British counterparts at GCHQ invented public key crypto several years before everybody else. They eat, drink, breathe, and smoke crypto and all kinds of telecom all day long because they are paid to do that. And their research budget is several times the budget of a small country. Paranoid? Sure, call me paranoid if you want, but if there is one organization that would be able to pull it off, it's NSA. And no, they are not interested in your privacy.
Oh, please. Windows can be cracked, and has been cracked, simply by pointing at a compromised web page. Automated software installation -- totally transparent and invisible to the user -- is trivial. Do a google search on "worm" or "Storm worm" for the latest example. And don't get me started on NAT.
They don't even need to gain physical access. If they can trick you to a web page that contains a trojan, you are dead meat. Period.
You haven't been paying attention to the news, lately, haven't you?
It does not matter if the communication is encrypted and broken down into packets if all that is needed is to intercept the complete communication at one (or both) ends. Under Windows, this can probably be accomplished trivially, since most apps run with administrator privileges under most Windows machines. And, running as a Windows administrator, Skype will alter your firewall configuration. Ooops.
What's more, most Internet packets these days pass through one of the MAE. And guess what? Most telecom companies who run the MAEs have agreed to cooperate with the NSA, including to the point they have built special facilities to allow NSA specialists to install eavesdropping equipment right there.
Finally, if you can intercept let's say 70% of a Skype communication, you probably have enough to determine if Alice and Bob should be put under further surveillance... Or maybe to disrupt their "nefarious" plans.
According to this PDF document, Skype encryption is based on open standard (such as AES, SHA-1, etc).
According to this article, our good friends at the NSA "may" have put backdoors in some of the technologies that could be used by Skype.
And, then, according to this other article, it does not matter what technologies you use, if your CPU is wide open to analysis and crypto attacks.
And, of course, there is the question of using a 'secure' communication system on a completely insecure operating system, such as Windows. Why do you think they talk of intercepting the communication before it becomes encrypted? Probably because the vast majority of suspects use Windows. Using Linux, or MacOS, would not be much of an improvement either.
Conclusion? Well, the Bundespolizei (that's German police to you) may not have the means to decipher your skype communications right now. But it's getting there, thank yo uvery much. And there are agencies out there who certainly can, and will.
And what happened to free german crypto? I thought Germany had the only sane policy about crypto in the industrial world?
Some people complain about Firefox AdBlock? Sheesh.
Note to self: remember to program Adblock to reject everything from DoubleClick from now on, on all home computers.
Gene Simmons is going to blast college kids for engaging in sex before marriage.
;-)
Something like: "Everyone knows stable marriages are the bedrock of civilized society, and stable marriages cannot be created except through abstinence before marriage! College kids these days are out of the f****** minds!!".
This being said, of course, after performing the following song in full KISS regalia...
Ah well, getting old and cranky will happen to us all, as they say.
Pros and Cons:
Pros: establishes Apple as THE platform for photographers and designers by removing the Windows competition. Sure, Apple could continue to fund the development of Photoshop and Illustrator for Windows. But the latest and greatest version would always appear on the Macintosh first.
Cons: even with its current pile of money (iPhone and Ipod are two very successful products after all), I am not sure Apple has enough money to buy Adobe. Not to mention Microsoft would certainly file an anti-trust suit. It also raises all kind of legal snafus in Europe for instance, which would certainly frown upon it.
Cons: Postscript and PDF are both open standards. I am not sure I'd like to see Apple control their future.
So, yes, and interesting prospect. Still pretty unlikely, though.
Except, of course, that OpenBSD is against binary blobs and NDAs, while some (not all) Linux programmers don't mind. This has been very well documented in the past.
I am always amazed when people who know nothing about OpenBSD or licenses talk about them, and simply propagate the received idea: 'BSD Bad, GPL Good'. But, hey, this is Slashdot, right?
Besides, Linux programmers haven't been exactly shy about appropriating OpenBSD BSD-licensed code and re-licensing it under the GPL. Which is OK under the BSD license, except those morons have removed all mention of the OpenBSD project in the copyright notice, which is considered as very rude, indeed.
Do you even know what you are talking about?
OpenBSD indicates all changes to its Ports/Packages on the following page.
If you have configured your OpenBSD machine properly, all that is needed to upgrade an installed package is to enter sudo pkg_add -vv -i -u package_name. No fuss, no muss, and it only takes a few minutes to upgrade all the installed programs to the latest version. No need to read mailing lists or web pages.
Finally, if you can't be bothered to read mailing lists and/or web pages to make sure your system is secure, I don't think you should be using OpenBSD in the first place. Stay with Windows, it's probably where you belong.