5.5: "Wrap in Time"
5.4: "Our favorite hacks"
5.3: "Blade Swimmer"
@@ -45,10 +46,10 @@ 4.6: "Planet of the Users"
4.5: "Games"
4.4: "Trial of the BSD Knights"
-4.3: "Home to Hypocrisy"
4.2: "100001 1010101"
4.1: "Puffy Baba and the 40 Vendors"
4.0: "Humppa Negala" and @@ -86,6 +87,58 @@
+ +
+5.6: "Ride of the Valkyries"
+|
+[Order OpenBSD items] +OpenBSD 5.6 CD2 track 2 is an +uncompressed copy of this song. + +3:54 (MP3 7.3MB) +(OGG 5.3MB) + + + 
+ |
+No lyrics. + |
+ + |
+
+No one wants to fork an open source project: it's a huge
+amount of work and isn't efficient in community time, but when you
+wake up one day and find that a hole in the SSL library you're using
+made world-wide news, and that the library's bad code style is
+hiding exploit mitigation countermeasures, then suddenly forking
+seems critically important. Two months of intense development later,
+LibreSSL was released.
+
+The bigger questions remain for the open source development community
+to answer: why did this occur? Why is the OpenSSL code base so hard
+to understand? Complexity is the enemy of security, so for something
+whose raison d'être is security, why are secondary goals allowed
+to endanger the absolute #1 goal? Or has OpenSSL become a brand which
+allows companies to — on the cheap — meet security
+"requirements" like FIPS instead of actually being secure?
+
+How important is it to developers and customers to have software
+where security is the goal? How much are they willing to push back
+on the OS developers and others to achieve that? Can we set a new,
+higher bar for best practices that will drive everyone to do more
+than just posture?
+
+
+Composed by Richard Wagner in July of 1851. Arranged and performed
+by Jonathan Lewis.
+
+
+
+
5.5: "Wrap in Time"
@@ -127,7 +180,7 @@ Don't wanna wrap back in timeDon't wanna wrap back in time
don't wrap! don't wrap!
-
