Theo de Raadt (ruBSD 2013)

I found this ~14 minute interview with Theo de Raadt from ruBSD very interesting and apropos OpenBSD's approach to trail-blazing "painful" changes: [VIDEO] tl;dw: Changes that must be done, must be DONE. The only way to see the ACTUAL impact is to just do it already and get feedback from real users. When the dust has settled, less brave projects can follow suit. I'm donating.

If you watch the the ruBSD 2013 interview video with Theo de Raadt[1] at the 6:36, he states that they should take a shot at dealing with modern x86 VMs. That gives me quite a bit of hope along with the work on vmware related drivers in each release. 1) [VIDEO]

If you watch the the ruBSD 2013 interview video with Theo de Raadt[1] at the 6:36, he states that they should take a shot at dealing with modern x86 VMs. That gives me quite a bit of hope along with the work on vmware related drivers in each release. I use VMware at work, seems to do ok. 1) [VIDEO]

[VIDEO] Edit: First 5 Minutes De Raadt speaks about Mitigation Techniques in comparison to other OSs, including FBSD. I fear, this is still true in mid-2015..

"The biggest problem with OpenBSD has been lack of support for hardware and virtualization, though a lot of the reason for this has been the OpenBSD team's own hostility towards virtualization. I get their reasoning (virtualization is a security issue), but the economic consequences have been devastating to their user base." If you watch the the ruBSD 2013 interview video with Theo de Raadt[1] at the 6:36, he states that they should take a shot at dealing with modern x86 VMs. That gives me quite a bit of hope along with the work on vmware related drivers in each release. I use VMware at work, seems to do ok. 1) [VIDEO]

your link is from 2007-10-24. more recently: from ruBSD in 2013 [VIDEO] (6:36 mark) People do change their minds as they learn new things or the world changes.

Linux security has been criticised[1] for not having security enabled by default, and for allowing users to disable the security measures. This leads to users avoiding setting minimal-rights policies, and leaving the doors open. When security is optional, policy issues in distributions also aren't fixed quickly. To limit applications rights to a minimum, SELinux, firewalls, and (systemd) sandboxes are all tools that could be used, but aren't in most installs. However, I think we are still lacking user-friendly interfaces (opensnitch is ported from MacOS). One idea could be to let the desktop environment restrict one more capability a application on every run, inform the user before running it and ask the user after if the software worked correctly. That would gradually lead to a minimum set of software rights. [1] [VIDEO]