• towerful@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    Why?
    I’ve tried to Google this, but it’s such a general statement I can’t find anything about it.
    Is it more mature in that regard? Sane/sensible/safe defaults for networking? More tools as part of the distribution for networking?
    Did FreeBSD (or it’s predecessor/upstream/whatever) define the standards, so the implementation is more correct?

    Or is it just that so many firewall applications run on top of FreeBSD (or a BSD flavour) eg opnSense, pfSense, openWRT (is openWRT actually BSD, idk)?
    So, kinda a historical/momentum thing. With the benefits of wide spread specific use

    • LinuxSBC@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      OpenBSD is focused on being incredibly secure, and they generally succeed. Firewalls need good security.

    • linearchaos@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      FreeBSD this focused on making a general use operating system

      Open BSD is focusing on security the developer insists on regular audits.

      Under most circumstances I wouldn’t really care, we’re getting a long well enough on Microsoft and Android with security updates all the time. That firewall man, it’s sitting out there with its ass hanging in the wind, The only thing between you and a billion hastily written scripts.