[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: IPFilter
- To: misc_(_at_)_openbsd_(_dot_)_org
- Subject: RE: IPFilter
- From: "Jim Rosenberg" <jr_ml_(_at_)_rossint_(_dot_)_net>
- Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2001 12:18:43 -0400
- Reply-to: jrosenberg_(_at_)_rossint_(_dot_)_net
On 17 Apr 2001, at 16:52, jan_(_at_)_hundert6_(_dot_)_de wrote:
> > Otoh if OpenBSD is billed as being a secure OS with a quick reaction
> > time to
> > vulnerabilities a patch (as with the other problems such as FTP and
> > NTP
> > lately) would be in order. What's the use of following the stable
> > branch if
> > problems like this have to be fixed separately?
>
> Simple.
> You keep track of all the effort that is currently being made and the
> results at any given moment. This doesn't automatically mean you get
> patches for everything that appears to have flaws.
I think all of us who use OpenBSD are EXTREMELY grateful for the work
the OpenBSD team puts in, and astonished at what they do for us.
Certainly we all understand that this wonderful work needs to be
prioritized. I take the postings in this thread as a plea that ipf
is very important to a lot of people, and we are requesting that the
priority for this patch be boosted.
There are some odd paradoxes at work here.
1. There is a double-standard in this group. On the one hand, users
are expected to update systems "by the book" (e.g. FAQ.) Now we're
expected to go outside the book and use somebody else's book? ("You
did *WHAT* to your system? Then don't expect help from *US*! ...")
The FAQ explains how the community expects systems to be updated. We
can't have it both ways. Either we accept that systems will be
updated by the FAQ or not. If we expect it will be done by the FAQ,
then if the code needed to update is not in the CVS repository,
that's a problem.
2. Anyone who reads the blizzard of security announcements in the
Linux world has *GOT* to be eternally grateful to Theo and the crew
for freeing us from what I call the Culture of Emergency. In the
Linux world, everyone lives by *nothing but* the culture of
emergency, because that's the only mechanism they have. While the
code audits in the OpenBSD world have given us an amazing amount of
freedom from the Culture of Emergency, I can't imagine that anyone
believes the OpenBSD team is perfect. Some day there will be an
emergency. It would be very paradoxical indeed if the current
amazing success at liberating us from the Culture of Emergency
renders us less able to cope with a real emergency.
The closed source world likes to sneer at the open source world
because -- they claim (*FALSELY* IMHO!) -- that no one in the open
source world will accept accountability. I, for one, am quite
pleased at the accountability taken by the OpenBSD team. Compared to
what you have to do to secure a Linux out-of-the-box installation it
is like a form of heaven. I'm sure the current IP Filter will make
it into the CVS repository "soon". But I don't see anything wrong
with using this group to speak up for what one would like to see
"really soon". This kind of give-and-take between users and
developers is healthy, as long as those of us on the user side are
realistic.
---
#include <disclaimer.h>
Jim Rosenberg
Ross Mould
259 S. College St.
Washington, PA 15301
(724) 222-7006 x 189
E-mail: jrosenberg_(_at_)_rossint_(_dot_)_net
Visit your host, monkey.org