upvote
It's a tricky balance. I certainly don't want my devices to have a ton of cruft installed which I would never need. But I also certainly don't want to have to spend a month after getting a new device just getting it into usable shape so I can use it for whatever I got it for. I used to think the second concern is very small since I do not get new devices that often, but turns out it's not true, it's often enough that I really want the OS to contain a lot of things from the start. OK, maybe not NetBIOS but wide enough device support and other capabilities so it would be useful for me. And if it's not, I - and most other technically competent, but busy people - would move on to something that provides that service. Goes double for people that are not technical, obviously.
reply
Sure, I don't disagree in principle with the idea that a smaller attack surface is better than a larger one, nor with the idea that explicitly enabling things is better than having to locate and disable services you didn't even know were running.

But saying "only two remote holes" gives the impression that all of OpenBSD is secure and that it's the most heavily scrutinized codebase in the world, it's bulletproof, etc.

It's not.

My toaster hasn't had a remote hole in a heck of a long time either, but then again it doesn't do anything other than make toast.

The default install of OpenBSD doesn't do anything, so the fact that it hasn't had a remote hole in forever isn't saying much.

reply
I think one has to keep in mind where that slogan came from. A time where every OS tried to start a million services listening on the network, when OpenBSD ended up minimizing that, because it was aware of attack surface.

Nowadays it does the same with being very defensive of complexity and adding features just for the sake of it. They actively remove features and technically break standards to reduce surface. So while the phrase might be dated the whole idea of doing the minimal thing to provide minimal attack surface is something that some other projects could very much benefit from. Especially in times where people use LLMs that happily write ten classes instead of a simple five line function everyone can easily understand and verify.

Also I think it simply became a bit of a meme and like with the art and music it became a bit of a project culture thing. Don't overanalyze it. It's a joke like "days since last accident" and how Shodan is a video game reference and firewall probably came from some fantasy nerd. Hey, the term sharding came from a video game as well!

reply
Your toaster does not run NetBSD? (-:
reply
> Which is almost certainly a combination of the complexities of govt IT procurement, the needs of non-technical users who may only be familiar with Windows & MS Office, and the enterprise management features of Windows that aren't as good in most other OSes.

... and if I were to guess, there's definitely backroom deals between the US government and Microsoft. There's no way all the phone home stuff is even included in "Windows for SCIF".

reply
if you mean as in Windows phoning home in normal installations, a Windows Enterprise install stripped of most unneeded components with Group policy won't really "phone home"

and you can always just airgap the thing

reply