undefined | Better HN

0 pointsprotomyth12y ago0 comments

Its one and the same, plus if you care about LibreSSL and OpenSSH than you need to care about OpenBSD because of the assumptions that code makes and what needs to added to the ported code to make it safe on other platforms.

0 comments

2 comments · 1 top-level

gonzo12y ago· 1 in thread

Horse feathers.

Consider that ntp.org is being funded, not OpenBSD (and their inferior OpenNTP).

NTP is infrastructure. OpenBSD is not.

Consider that OpenSSL is being funded, not OpenBSD ( and their unusable at this point libressl project).

OpenSSL is infrastructure.

OpenSSH got some funding, because it is widely used. It is infrastructure, not 3-5 people scratching an itch in a project.

protomythOP12y ago

> Consider that OpenSSL is being funded, not OpenBSD ( and their unusable at this point libressl project).

> OpenSSH got some funding, because it is widely used. It is infrastructure, not 3-5 people scratching an itch in a project.

I'm not sure what to say as I think you missed my point by a mile. Giving money to OpenSSH or LibreSSL is giving money to OpenBSD, it is the same people and same foundation.

OpenSSH and, now, LibreSSL are project written to OpenBSD first and then ported. Ported platforms that don't have the libraries these projects expect (which are developed for OpenBSD) have those functions ported[1]. They are the same project with parts ported to other platforms.

I have no clue what the 3-5 people comment is even about.

1) with some exceptions such as generation of entropy since only the OS can do that well.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse