BSD And Other Things

/bsd/ - *BSD General Thread
Discuss FreeBSD, OpenBSD, NetBSD, DragonFlyBSD, FreeNAS...

IRC -- #baot @ irc.rizon.net

News: dragonflydigest.com - undeadly.org - freebsdnews.com

Ask questions, get answers.

Other urls found in this thread:

evonide.com/how-we-broke-php-hacked-pornhub-and-earned-20000-dollar/
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Which of these four anime girls would you waifu? Dips on OpenBSD.

Can i use mpv on them?

Yes, there is a port of mpv to BSD.

test

you do realize bsd sucks right?

Right???

Go shitpost somewhere else

i was just testing my tripcode ;_;

I can already hear Theo's voice in my head screaming explatives, but...

OpenBSD on a gen 2 Hyper-V VM? (uEFI). Is it possible?

why so you can talk about literally nothing?

what grand gospel are you going to show us oh great one

You're the same shitposter who comes to every single BSD thread. I'm just happy you changed your tactics.

when will blakkheim stop sucking dick?

bsd shitposters are many

because bsd is hipster horseshit. linux is too popular among the majority of computer nerds so some need to feel ultra special by using something that has no more reason to be around.

This

/thread

>hipster horseshit
Popularity does equal quality. Dismissing it as hipster bullshit because it's not super popular is unfair.

There's absolutely nothing to discuss, there's no reason to use BSD in the desktop and the reasons you people give when someone asks are completely ridiculous, as you don't use any of those features.

OpenBSD can run on a VM, yeah.

But it's designed for bare metal.

>hipster horseshit
>muh hipsters
see, you ARE one of them

What real reason do you use BSD for (If you actually use it)?

i've specified it a few times, i do it out of preference, not to go "hurrr i dont like linux because its popular"

i don't like linux because of what redhat is doing to it, i don't like it because the file hierarchy is a fucking mess and i have plenty of other reasons to not like it

If you don't like it, why are you here?

Right, and I'm used to running it bare metal. But I'd like to do some tinkering, and I'm running Hyper-V.

when will you fags stop replying to the buttblasted arch hipster

you're just making him feel like a special snowflake again and derailing the thread

anyway, is OpenBSD any good as a hypervisor?

wtf does that mean? it doesn't have qemu/xen drivers?

>hypervisor
there's no hypervisor in openbsd, but its coming

Oh, I've heard of people running it on Xen.

Don't run it on virtualbox, though.

popularity isn't everything but when you see something that is older than linux slowly die over a few decades the thought that somethings wrong has to occur.

oh well, I'm going to get called a retard but I'm trying to find a way to kludge slowlaris onto a laptop with no wifi drivers for it, plus I need a dedicated *BSD box

are there any on FreeBSD?

I think bhyve is the FreeBSD hypervisor.

I'm not familiar with how all that virtualization stuff works, but I think that's the right direction.

>Preference
Good to hear. It's funny when a vocal minority of BSD users try to pick a fight with Linux for no actual reasons

why? even in headless mode gives problem?

For whatever reason, the resolution doesn't go above 1024x768 in virtualbox.

Virtualbox also does weird shit to the memory, so the virtual console's background randomly turns red for some reason.

so using it only on a ssh connection should be ok? isn't it a server os? why should I need a GUI?

nice, I'll have to go take a look at it
was also considering SmartOS which is a straight Solaris derivative with KVM, BSD would probably be much more useful by itself though as far as the application base goes

>so using it only on a ssh connection should be ok
yes
>isn't it a server os
it's pretty general purpose
>why should I need a GUI
to use it as a desktop, you can choose to not install X during the install

I already use linux as a desktop os, isn't it better? in the previous thread someone said BSD's browser performance is not so great...
also I've always heard good things about BSD networking, filesystems and other not-desktop components
I'm autistic but not so much

firefox performs well enough here

dont know about chromium

don't listen to the shitposting retards, obviously

>inb4 ENJOY YOUR BROWSER OS SENPAI

>implying any desktop os isn't a browser os

isn't it funny that they claim it's a browser OS then they claim you can't browse the internet on it

Wait BSDs have wifi drivers?

Nice progress haha so proud

It's good to see them being ahead of the curve

>tipping levels at maximum

Preparing my anus^H^H^H^H VM

>but its coming
INNOVASHUN

can you fuck off

It's funny, I might be wrong but if memory serves BSD threads used to be FreeBSD and OpenBSD users flaming each other. Now it's pretty peaceful trying to fight off a few GNU/Linux shitposters.

why are you against openbsd innovating?

I like how no one replied

What's that supposed to mean?

LMAO BSD is a useless piece of shit.

There exists ZERO practical reasons to use it, even in a virtual machine

> if memory serves BSD threads used to be FreeBSD and OpenBSD
try one freebsd autist shitting on openbsd for no reason

the art's pretty bad desu

Lets see...

Packet Filter
CARP
Oh, and the BSD network stack being the gold standard for how long?

Lol what the fuck are those, get some AMD drivers first lmao

actually here's a better picture

> Assblasted AMD fanboy
> No real world experience

Come back when you have a clue of what you're talking about, kthxbai...

Do you have one for OpenBSD?

nope, unfortunately that's the only one i could find actually drawn by a japanese artist

Well fuck. That's pretty good art and I was hoping the other BSDs would have one as well.

Yeah, come back when you can actually run your toy OS in a real desktop autistic retard.

and it's funny that there's so much focus on the daemon-tan because JNUG stands for Japanese NetBSD User Group

>toy OS
>autistic retard
user, you should really try to get out of your parents basement once in a while. There's a whole world out there to experience.

>real world
>no drivers
top fucking kek

why are you spreading FUD

you know damn well there are radeon BSD drivers

BSD is a toy OS, no one actually uses it. I tired PC-BSD in VMWare a while ago.
The fucking (Xfce) system freezes at boot. Doesn't even have any drivers I was looking at the forums and apparently that's to be expected

that's because PC-BSD is shit

take all the bad things about linux and stick them on FreeBSD and you have PC-BSD

the thing even comes with GRUB, for fuck's sake

If you hate BSD, why are you here? You're just here to shitpost and you know it.

PC-BSD is FreeBSD

that's why i said "stick them on FreeBSD"

Does it even have any Live ISO?

i don't even think so

Why does PC-BSD even exist?

>PC-BSD is shit
>the other pieces of shit are great tho
>except freebsd is untested because it's a toy for applecucks
>and netbsd only works on toasters
>and openbsd is busy copying^Winnovating so nothing actually works
backpedaling every time!

Because some people don't have the time to compile desktop environment

>There exists ZERO practical reasons to use it
>practical reasons in networking
>WTF is networking useless because no AMD drivers
>confirmed basement dweller
>but muh desktop OS
>Get out of your parents basement
> BSD is a toys OS because I couldn't make it work

Got it, you're a fucking idiot. Pull down OpenBSD and configure packet filter for a firewall, with CARP for redundancy.

And before you scream "But muh desktop!" remember, nobody else said anything about BSD just on desktops...

I don't even know, I think it's iXsystem's poor excuse for an OEM operating system.

>backpedaling
Oh it's you again, fuck off. The mods have deleted your posts a few times, don't you get it?

You don't have to compile them.

I think PC-BSD is the linux mint of BSD. It comes with a GUI installer because a few terminal commands apparently scare people.

>obody else said anything about BSD just on desktops
Nice backpedaling see Stay mad haha

Well at least Linux Mint doesn't have a poor excuse of a YaST clone that sticks out like a sore thumb.

Did I mention that FreeBSD allows you to use UFS instead of ZFS (which is recommended on a desktop) but PC-BSD doesn't let you do it?

Are you on ZFS right now?
This is a post from 2005 and see how it came true

Comparing Gentoo Linux, Windows XP Pro, and FreeBSD, I’d definitely have to say that FreeBSD sucks royally. Windows XP Pro and Gentoo Linux both rock, but in different ways; Gentoo Linux offers exceptional command line and configuration options, and is very very fast, whereas Windows XP Pro is untouchable in terms of its GUI and the quality of the software that runs on it. My experience with FreeBSD has been disappointing and a complete letdown, particularly after the hype I’d read about it (for example, “If Yahoo! servers use FreeBSD, it must be a good OS”). Besides the crappy colorless default shell, many of the ports are broken. My opinion, stick with using both Gentoo Linux and Windows XP Pro for desktop applications (on a dual-boot, combining them with VMware); If using a server, go with Gentoo Linux, for its exceptional speed. Windows servers are easy to set up but suck in terms of speed. FreeBSD may be a good server OS, but it’s such a lousy OS in general, that I wouldn’t want to waste any more time with it.

I won’t even comment on Macs, since they suck even more than FreeBSD. In fact, I think Mac OS is possibly the worst OS ever. It’s like Windows for dummies, but worse, because it’s built on top of the crappy BSD kernel.

In conclusion, FreeBSD is dead. Apple OS is a joke which is only taken seriously by the computer illiterate and mentally challenged. Gentoo Linux and Windows are the future.

Why doesn't OpenBSD believe in MAC? Isn't it sort of short-sighted to believe no software will ever contain bugs?

OpenBSD is stubborn to implement features they find overly complicated that will make auditing difficult. A MAC like feature called pledge is coming soon. They like the idea of MAC, but want to implement it in a simple way.

>isn't it a server os
>it's pretty general purpose
You might want to re-read that...

But it's alright, user, you can be wrong. I'm sure your parents still love you.

>Are you on ZFS right now?
I use OpenBSD, so no.

Because MACs are so inconvenient that people just turn them off, defeating their whole purpose.
>Isn't it sort of short-sighted to believe no software will ever contain bugs?
What? When did they say that? The entire point of the mitigations in OpenBSD is to crash those buggy programs before they do any damage. W^X as of OpenBSD 6.0 will be enforced so hard that you'll have to allow specific partitions to violate W^X (pretty much only /usr/local since that's where all the third party stuff is).

>Besides the crappy colorless default shell
this alone is a crime against humanity

Aww your're so cute when you get cornered

>general purpose
>Somehow it's not desktop

Linux runs on servers
Linux runs on desktops
Linux runs on mobile phones
Linux runs on routers

No reasons to use BSD

>features they find overly complicated
Are they incompetent?

It's simple though.

BSD competes with Linux
Linux competes with Windows
Makes you think, doesn't it?

>Linux
Yes, and it runs the BSD network stack.

>general purpose
>Somehow it's not desktop
You should really get your eyes checked

>And before you scream "But muh desktop!" remember, nobody else said anything about BSD just on desktops...

From what I've read about pledges, they're absolutely nothing like MAC and more like discretionary capability dropping. (A direct contradiction of the “mandatory” part of mandatory access controls)

That said, I still like the idea of programs dropping privileges as much as possible, and pledges extend that privilege dropping to syscalls - but the sad part about it is that it requires source-level software support, which is an unreasonable assumption to make for general software. (Especially cross-platform software)

>What? When did they say that?
Isn't the entire OpenBSD philosophy pretty much “all we have to care about is writing code that's as hard as possible to exploit”? As far as I can tell there's no or little contingency plan for dealing with software that *is* exploited, which is what MAC or auditing subsystems provide. (i.e. assume firefox gets 0dayed into running arbitrary code -> what damage could it do to your system?)

>W^X
Doesn't ROP make W^X almost entirely useless? (Although I know that e.g. PaX actually has ROP prevention)

>General purpose OS that's not meant for desktops
I like your mental acrobatics. More please hahaha

No, it's called sane design. See post here It's why all their programs like pf have a simple configuration syntax.

>Isn't the entire OpenBSD philosophy pretty much “all we have to care about is writing code that's as hard as possible to exploit”?
Part of it is writing good and clean code, yes, but it's not the only part of it. Obviously, from good code comes good programs that do what they're supposed to.

W^X isn't the only mitigation either. There's ASLR and there's stack-smashing protection built into their own GCC. I believe ASLR should prevent ROP, no?

Note however that OpenBSD never claimed that these were their ideas, contrary to what that shitposter wants you to believe. All OpenBSD did is enforce them and force their users to use them. This results in patches that improve code that eventually get sent upstream.

Just switch to Linux already

/thread

replying to yourself is bad form

>BSD competes with Linux
What? Linux dominates, there's no competition.

Nope

>I believe ASLR should prevent ROP, no?
Not necessarily. Due to the nature of use-after-free, reference corruption or pointer leaking bugs, it's often possible to find the right address base, which again enables you to use a ROP program.

See e.g. evonide.com/how-we-broke-php-hacked-pornhub-and-earned-20000-dollar/ for a recent example of an attack that used ROP to attack a system which has ASLR enabled. SSP is also helpful , but it too has work-arounds.

In summary, both ASLR and SSP just reduce the attack surface, but they are not bulletproof defenses. (And I assume the same is true for PaX's ROP prevention)

>OpenBSD never claimed that these were their ideas
please, there's no need to lie on the internet; and for what? defending a shit toy?

Is it possible for you to attack BSD without relying on memes and buzzwords?

>Sometimes these ideas have been used before in some random application written somewhere, but perhaps not taken to the degree that we do.
reminder