full-disclosure - RE: [ISN] DARPA pulls OpenBSD funding

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.50.0304191059100.21179-100000@server.dimick.net>
From: denis at dimick.net (Denis Dimick)
Subject: RE: [ISN] DARPA pulls OpenBSD funding

One thing I have a very hard time undersanding is this:

Here in the US we have free-speach, this means you can pretty much say 
what ever you want, and most of the time there is very little people can 
do about this. 

But when you make your living off of people buying your products, and you 
say things that people dont like, why is it wrong for people to decide not 
to buy your products?

It seems to me this is what happened with DARPA and Open BSD..

I guess the story here is yes we have free speach, but if you depend on 
others to make your living, maybe you may want to watch what you say, 
least you piss off the people that give you the money to make your 
living..

On Sat, 19 Apr 2003, Paul Schmehl wrote:

> Somehow I think Theo will find some way to get the project done.  He was 
> doing fine before the DARPA project.
> 
> I do find it interesting that you characterize Theo as "expressing his 
> views" yet you characterize DARPA as "politicizing a technical project". 
> Weren't they both doing the same thing?  Why the difference in the 
> characterization?
> 
> --On Saturday, April 19, 2003 09:10:53 AM -0500 Curt Purdy 
> <purdy@...man.com> wrote:
> 
> > Unfortunately, one of the things that seems to have been overlooked in
> > this political discussion, which I believe does not have a place in this
> > technical forum, is that a great and sorely needed project is in jeopardy.
> > OpenBSD is generally considered one of the most secure network operating
> > systems available today, and that is even before the recent announcement
> > of the new resistance, if not vulnerability to buffer overflows which can
> > be considered the holy grail of programming.
> >
> > Whether you feel da Raadt was wrong for expressing his views on peace, or
> > that DARPA was wrong for politicizing a technical project, the point here
> > should be that the entire technical world is the loser...
> 
> Paul Schmehl (pauls@...allas.edu)
> Adjunct Information Security Officer
> The University of Texas at Dallas
> AVIEN Founding Member
> http://www.utdallas.edu
> _______________________________________________
> Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
> Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
>