-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Andy R <quadreverb@yahoo.com> writes:

> Parsing... Yeah, I mentioned something about it
> flaming up NetBSD types... Can't really dispute Theo's
> goal of a secure operating system though, and it being
> based on NetBSD is a tip of the hat in my book. Not
> that we're necessarily insecure...

If you believe OpenBSD is more secure than NetBSD, then you've got a
future in being a sucker to all types of marketing.

I remember when OpenBSD first started up, they took every patch from
the NetBSD bug database and applied them.  Without thinking about it.
They created several bugs in the process, and at least one of them was
in the kernel.

I can't believe they are more secure no matter how many audits they
perform.  They started from something that was much less stable than
the then-NetBSD, and if the audits have increased security, perhaps
they're on par with NetBSD now.

- --Michael
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (NetBSD)
Comment: See http://www.flame.org/~explorer/pgp for my keys

iD8DBQE9Y/tJl6Nz7kJWYWYRArCkAJ0fDwHbVV7qcBmF6elfccn9QSYBnwCffxiW
E2Bk0s33EM/V7EY33F9DSt4=
=emWi
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----