Microsoft Now OpenBSD Foundation Gold Contributor

[Ralf Mardorf]

On Sat, 2015-07-11 at 00:05 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Jul 2015 14:30:21 -0700, Mehmet Erol Sanliturk wrote:
> > This means that , claiming that "copy-left licensed software is 
> > more
> > secure than permissive licensed software" is a groundless and
> > incorrect claim .
> 
> I agree, but there is a valid claim that doesn't depend on the 
> chossen
> free license.
> 
> This one:
>  A non-restrictive, open source OS is more secure than a restricted 
> OS.
>  But even for non-restrictive, open source operating systems there 
> are
>  differences. It has less to do with the chosen system or license, 
> BSD,
>  GNU/Linux or what ever, but with the policy.
> 
>  A FreeBSD or Arch Linux or Linux from scratch user will set up the
>  install, the user has much control over the install. An Ubuntu Linux
>  flavour user installs an environment that works out of the box, so
>  there is less control and it already leads to issues.
> 
> https://www.fsf.org/blogs/rms/ubuntu-spyware-what-to-do
> 
> Today I started a discussion on several Linux mailing lists after a
> Xubuntu user reported that the root password is required, when bug
> report pop up windows ask to generate and send a bug report.
> 
> IOW there are two approaches, the approach from restricted OSes, that
> is used by some OOTB non-restricted open source OSes too, that 
> usually
> claim to be user-friendly and the "real" non-restricted open source
> user-centric approach.
> 
> The non-restricted open source user-centric approach is more secure.
> The approach has less to do with the chosen OS or used free license.
> 
> 2 Cents,
> Ralf

PS: IOW it doesn't matter if the thingy in your satellite receiver is
GPLed or has got a BSD license, since it's a so called user-friendly
approach thingy. You don't have any control over this thingy.