Date: Sat, 11 Jul 2015 00:16:36 +0200 From: Ralf Mardorf <ralf.mardorf@rocketmail.com> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Microsoft Now OpenBSD Foundation Gold Contributor Message-ID: <1436566596.18451.17.camel@rocketmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20150711000551.414cfc4b@archlinux> References: <BLU437-SMTP2B8F14BE7B4D30D13EC96809F0@phx.gbl> <559FF775.7030204@mgm51.com> <33650.128.135.70.2.1436549147.squirrel@cosmo.uchicago.edu> <55A00F43.90908@gmail.com> <20150710212456.70c0d1db.freebsd@edvax.de> <CAOgwaMs=bV4=eb3XTKZKGb62ds7mr_vZ37=0myjw1id7MKtY4w@mail.gmail.com> <20150711000551.414cfc4b@archlinux>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, 2015-07-11 at 00:05 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote: > On Fri, 10 Jul 2015 14:30:21 -0700, Mehmet Erol Sanliturk wrote: > > This means that , claiming that "copy-left licensed software is > > more > > secure than permissive licensed software" is a groundless and > > incorrect claim . > > I agree, but there is a valid claim that doesn't depend on the > chossen > free license. > > This one: > A non-restrictive, open source OS is more secure than a restricted > OS. > But even for non-restrictive, open source operating systems there > are > differences. It has less to do with the chosen system or license, > BSD, > GNU/Linux or what ever, but with the policy. > > A FreeBSD or Arch Linux or Linux from scratch user will set up the > install, the user has much control over the install. An Ubuntu Linux > flavour user installs an environment that works out of the box, so > there is less control and it already leads to issues. > > https://www.fsf.org/blogs/rms/ubuntu-spyware-what-to-do > > Today I started a discussion on several Linux mailing lists after a > Xubuntu user reported that the root password is required, when bug > report pop up windows ask to generate and send a bug report. > > IOW there are two approaches, the approach from restricted OSes, that > is used by some OOTB non-restricted open source OSes too, that > usually > claim to be user-friendly and the "real" non-restricted open source > user-centric approach. > > The non-restricted open source user-centric approach is more secure. > The approach has less to do with the chosen OS or used free license. > > 2 Cents, > Ralf PS: IOW it doesn't matter if the thingy in your satellite receiver is GPLed or has got a BSD license, since it's a so called user-friendly approach thingy. You don't have any control over this thingy.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1436566596.18451.17.camel>