Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 30 Sep 2000 12:27:52 -0700
From:      Jordan Hubbard <jkh@winston.osd.bsdi.com>
To:        Kris Kennaway <kris@FreeBSD.ORG>
Cc:        Adam Laurie <adam@algroup.co.uk>, security@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: cvs commit: ports/mail/pine4 Makefile (fwd) 
Message-ID:  <2876.970342072@winston.osd.bsdi.com>
In-Reply-To: Message from Kris Kennaway <kris@FreeBSD.ORG>  of "Sat, 30 Sep 2000 11:56:27 PDT." <20000930115627.C39894@freefall.freebsd.org> 

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> If you're talking about policy changes like restricting telnet etc,
> then unfortunately those discussions will almost always be taken over
> by the armchair generals and theres not much you can do about it

Erm, as one of the possible arm-chair generals in question, I think
this vastly over-simplifies the argument and ignores the fact that
many of us so-called "arm chair generals" are not just nit-picking
individual changes or standing in the way for the sheer hell of it but
are, in fact, defending an entire ideology which we occasionally see
in danger of being fatally compromised.

The ideology I'm talking about is nothing less than "base functionality"
and how users perceive the system, a perception which has been, in so
many demonstrably favorable ways, carefully cultivated and honed over
the 7+ years of FreeBSD's existence.  FreeBSD is known for giving a
rich out-of-box experience and being (comparatively) easy to install
and use by a certain percentage of the user population.  FreeBSD is
also used in preference to other alternatives such as NetBSD, OpenBSD
and BSD/OS for many of those reasons.

So, when the security mavens come around and start waving the Big
Stick at things which compromise their own vision of what constitutes
an ideal out-of-box operating system configuration, it shouldn't come
as a surprise to anyone if it sometimes runs into conflict with the
"established vision", one which has been established for many good
reasons of its own given how FreeBSD has differentiated itself and
continues to do so.

This is no less than a clash of fundamental ideologies at work and
neither "side" will advance for as long as people ignore this fact and
fail to realize that both sides are in fact "right" for some value of
the term just as they're both "wrong", that being nothing less than a
fundamental law which can't and won't be changed through argument.
Once we've achieved that perspective, we can start achieving
compromises which somehow increase security without seriously
decreasing the positive attributes which got FreeBSD to where it is in
the first place.  Enough said.

- Jordan


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?2876.970342072>