On Wed, Dec 05, 2007 at 02:23:41PM -0600, Marco Peereboom wrote:
I'm not talking about updates, I can read C.
> maybe you are now going to be able to figure out why we don't need
You're ignoring that it is perhaps quite insane to expect anyone to
verify every single line of code, and a (so far very much deserved)
trust is given to the developers. Which is why I would very much like to
be absolutely sure the CD I bought brought the release the developers
intended to publish.
This is not about downloading OpenBSD, but of having a quite measurable
degree of trust that what you have is what you were supposed to have.
Btw, it would be much better to use a hashing algorithm stronger
than MD5, even on the file signed by an OpenPGP or X.509 certificate.
Rui
--
Wibble.
Today is Setting Orange, the 48th day of The Aftermath in the YOLD 3173
+ No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown
+ Whatever you do will be insignificant,
| but it is very important that you do it -- Gandhi
+ So let's do it...?
| Adrian Bunk | Re: Linux 2.6.21 |
| Linus Torvalds | Linux 2.6.21-rc2 |
| WANG Cong | [-mm Patch] UML: fix a building error |
| Roland McGrath | Re: [PATCH 0/5] ftrace: to kill a daemon |
git: | |
| Natalie Protasevich | [BUG] New Kernel Bugs |
| David Miller | Re: [PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock(). |
| Patrick McHardy | Re: [PATCH] netfilter: use per-cpu spinlock rather than RCU (v3) |
| Gerrit Renker | [PATCH 27/37] dccp: Integration of dynamic feature activation - part 2 (server side) |
| Theodore Ts'o | Re: cc1 fails silently |
| Michael Nolan | Power routines on notebook cause kernel panic |
| Marc Peters | v 0.11 boot disk problem |
| Dave `geek' Gymer | WARNING (was Re: New afio release) |
