D.J. Bernstein: The Good News Archive
aaronsw.com
aaronsw.com
Qmail is an example of how to success in security, but then fail another way. DJB never reviewed contributed features, or reimplemented them the "right/secure way". There was absolutely no plan to evolve Qmail, so it was unable to fit future requirements.
This catastrophic project management literally provoked forks and patches. People had to modify the original Qmail to get even basic features such as SMTP authentiation or integration with spam scanners. Many patches of questionable quality are flying around, and no official next version of qmail.
So to be fair, we should count the bugs in the Qmail forks (e.g. qmail-ng), because these are the versions that are actually used.
there was a discussion of it on dns-operations[1] the other day
[1]https://lists.dns-oarc.net/pipermail/dns-operations/2010-Feb...
http://ideas.4brad.com/overengineering-and-non-deployment-ss...
Thanks for reposting the OpenDNS news. Had missed it.
Every pure transformation (i.e. function) in Haskell is safe from side effects. There is a very clean and safe separation beween pure and impure code. So an operating system based on Haskell, with a Haskell shell and the like, would be a very secure environment.
Of course, that means the Haskell compilers and interpreters have to be secure, but the same holds for C compilers, too.
I know he has several detractors, but that doesn't prevent his ideas to spread, albeit slowly.
We all stand to gain.