Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

OpenBSD


OpenBSD is a free, multi-platform operating system descended from the Berkeley Software Distribution (BSD), developed by a volunteer team with a primary focus on code correctness, proactive audits, portability, , and integrated cryptography. Forked from in October 1995 by after his departure from the core team amid disagreements over project direction and management, the project released its first version in 1996 and has since maintained a rigorous six-month release cycle. Led by de Raadt from , , OpenBSD prioritizes simplicity and scrutiny of to minimize vulnerabilities, originating influential software components such as for secure remote access, (Packet Filter) for firewalling, and as a -hardened of following the vulnerability. The operating system implements pioneering mechanisms including memory protection (preventing code execution in writable memory pages), privilege separation to isolate processes, and (Address Space Layout Randomization), contributing to its claim of only two remote exploits affecting the default install over nearly three decades of development. These features, combined with comprehensive code audits, have positioned OpenBSD as a foundation for tools adopted across various operating systems, though its niche usage reflects trade-offs in hardware support and user-friendliness for prioritizing over broader compatibility.

History

Founding and Fork from NetBSD

Theo de Raadt, a Canadian , served as a co-founder and key developer of , contributing significantly to its early ports and codebase following the project's inception in 1993. In December 1994, amid escalating tensions, de Raadt was requested by NetBSD's core team to resign his position as a senior developer, citing his "rude and abusive" communications as detrimental to the project; this action severed his commit access and stemmed from broader disagreements over development practices and strategic direction. On October 18, 1995, de Raadt initiated the OpenBSD project by forking the NetBSD 1.0 codebase and creating its initial CVS repository, marking the formal divergence. This fork attracted a group of developers aligned with de Raadt's vision, establishing him as the project's leader. From its outset, OpenBSD diverged philosophically from NetBSD by prioritizing rigorous code audits for security vulnerabilities, emphasis on correctness and simplicity in implementation, and proactive elimination of insecure practices, in contrast to NetBSD's primary focus on maximal portability across hardware architectures. These priorities reflected de Raadt's conviction that security required deliberate, audit-driven development rather than incidental outcomes of broader engineering goals.

Early Development and Releases (1995–2000)

Following the initial fork from NetBSD in late 1994, OpenBSD entered a phase of code cleanup and stabilization in 1995, with the creation of its CVS repository on October 18 and the release of early snapshots to facilitate testing and contributions from users. These snapshots primarily targeted the i386 architecture but laid the foundation for broader portability, building on inherited ports to platforms like SPARC from prior NetBSD efforts. The small volunteer team, led by Theo de Raadt and comprising a handful of dedicated developers, prioritized auditing and removing problematic code to enhance reliability and security from the outset. The project's first FTP-available release, OpenBSD 1.2, appeared in July 1996, representing an initial stabilization milestone with improvements in driver support and system utilities. This was followed by OpenBSD 2.0 on October 1, 1996, the inaugural official release, which included refinements to the kernel and userland, along with explicit recognition by as a distinct platform separate from . These early releases emphasized proactive auditing to eliminate unused or insecure code, while expanding hardware compatibility to include emerging architectures like Alpha, enabling deployment on diverse systems such as DEC workstations. By 1997, with OpenBSD 2.1, the project introduced the first implementation in any free operating system, providing native support for secure VPN tunneling and authentication headers via the Authentication Header (AH) and Encapsulating Security Payload (ESP) protocols. This innovation stemmed from the team's focus on integrating robust early, predating widespread adoption in other systems. Through the late , the volunteer developer base grew modestly to support ongoing releases—such as 2.2 in December 1997 and up to 2.8 in July 2000—while maintaining a commitment to portability across RISC architectures like and Alpha, alongside continued i386 dominance. The era solidified OpenBSD's reputation for deliberate, audit-driven evolution amid limited resources.

Maturation and Key Milestones (2001–Present)

In May 2001, OpenBSD 3.0 introduced , a stateful packet filter providing sophisticated network traffic control, including filtering, normalization, and , which supplanted the earlier IPFilter and became a cornerstone of OpenBSD's networking security. This implementation emphasized clean, auditable code and innovative syntax for rule sets, influencing designs in other systems. OpenSSH, originating in OpenBSD 2.6 in December 1999 as a reimplementation of the SSH protocol with cleaned licensing and enhanced security, underwent sustained refinement post-2001, incorporating protocol version 2 support, privilege separation in 2003, and ongoing cryptographic upgrades to mitigate vulnerabilities like those in early SSH-1. Its portable variant, maintained in parallel, achieved broad adoption across systems by the mid-2000s, underscoring OpenBSD's role in fostering reusable security tools without compromising the project's code discipline. The 2013 Heartbleed vulnerability in , exposing buffer over-read flaws, prompted OpenBSD developers in April 2014 to OpenSSL 1.0.1g into , stripping obsolete , reducing codebase size by over 100,000 lines, and prioritizing modern ciphers and auditability to address perceived maintenance neglect and potential deliberate weaknesses. Project founder cited OpenSSL's "broken design" and suspicions of intelligence agency influence on cryptographic libraries—echoing post-Snowden disclosures—as drivers for the , which integrated libtls for simplified usage and rejected features like that had enabled exploits. OpenBSD's maturation included proactive responses to hardware evolution, expanding beyond traditional x86 to arm64 platforms for broader applicability in and low-power environments. OpenBSD 7.8, released October 21, 2025, added initial support for the 5, enabling console operation via alongside drivers for its SDHC controller and GPIO, reflecting iterative porting efforts to contemporary single-board computers. This milestone built on prior arm64 advancements, prioritizing verified boot and minimal dependencies for secure deployment on resource-constrained devices.

Development Model

Core Principles and Practices

OpenBSD's development philosophy centers on achieving correctness, , , and portability as foundational goals, with a strong emphasis on proactive measures to eliminate vulnerabilities before they can be exploited. This approach manifests in rigorous code audits across the entire codebase, where developers systematically review and refactor to identify and mitigate potential flaws, prioritizing simplicity to reduce complexity that could introduce attack surfaces. By , the project rejects unnecessary features or dependencies that hinder auditability, favoring a minimalistic architecture that aligns with Unix principles of doing one thing well, thereby enhancing verifiability and long-term maintainability. A key tenet is the "secure by default" ethos, under which the operating system ships with conservative configurations that disable non-essential services and enable protective measures automatically, obviating the need for users to possess advanced expertise for basic protection. This contrasts with systems requiring extensive post-installation hardening, as OpenBSD integrates considerations into the development process from the outset, including memory-safe practices and privilege separation where feasible to limit impact of any residual bugs. The project adheres to a disciplined six-month release cycle, targeting May and November, during which the -current development branch provides frequent snapshots for testing while maintaining stability for production use. Releases emphasize adherence to standards such as for command-line utilities and APIs, ensuring portability and compatibility without deviating into proprietary extensions that could compromise correctness. Patch submissions undergo thorough reviews to uphold code quality, with developers expected to update concurrently to reflect changes accurately.

Team Structure and Governance

OpenBSD operates as a volunteer-driven project under the leadership of founder , who serves as the primary maintainer and exerts significant influence over development decisions. De Raadt, who initiated the project in 1995 by forking , retains central authority, including veto power on commits, fostering a tightly controlled focused on and quality. This leadership style emphasizes , where commit privileges—known as "commit bits"—are granted sparingly to trusted developers based on demonstrated ability to produce high-quality, secure code. The core development team comprises a small group of dozens of active committers, far fewer than larger projects like or , enabling rigorous review but limiting scalability. Contributions from the broader community occur primarily through submission of patches, or "diffs," to the [email protected] , where they undergo by existing developers before potential integration. Automated commit notifications are distributed via [email protected], promoting transparency in changes to the source tree. Governance relies on informal processes rather than formal bylaws, with decisions guided by technical merit, adherence to project goals like code correctness and portability, and collective developer input on mailing lists. Access to commit privileges is merit-based and revocable; developers have been removed for submitting substandard code or engaging in disruptive conduct, upholding stringent standards but drawing criticism for perceived centralization around de Raadt. This approach prioritizes long-term stability over rapid expansion, though it has been noted to constrain growth due to the limited number of reviewers.

Code Auditing and Quality Assurance

OpenBSD enforces a mandatory process wherein developers submit proposed modifications as diffs to mailing lists for by peers before any commit to tree. This line-by-line examination targets defects, inefficiencies, and security flaws, with approval typically requiring an "ok" from at least one experienced reviewer. Audits extend beyond initial reviews, with code frequently re-examined multiple times by developers possessing diverse skill sets, including those with prior commercial auditing experience. A core team of approximately 6 to 12 members performs continuous, comprehensive file-by-file analysis, identifying regardless of proven exploitability and applying tree-wide fixes to address underlying patterns. This methodical practice prioritizes root-cause elimination over isolated remediation, yielding empirically lower defect rates through causal intervention at the code level rather than post-hoc mitigations. Such auditing has directly informed the integration of foundational protections like memory policies, first enforced in OpenBSD 3.3 (2003), which prohibit simultaneous write and execute permissions on memory pages to thwart common exploitation techniques uncovered during reviews. While OpenBSD maintains simplicity in its C codebase to aid manual verification, it incorporates limited static analysis where applicable, but relies primarily on human oversight for .

Technical Features

Kernel and System Architecture

The OpenBSD kernel is a monolithic design inherited from the 4.4BSD lineage, integrating device drivers, file systems, networking stacks, and other core subsystems into a single for streamlined execution and simplified auditing. Forked from /current in October 1995, it retains the BSD heritage of tight coupling between kernel and userland components, emphasizing code correctness over modularity for performance gains seen in approaches. While supporting (SMP) for multi-core systems since OpenBSD 2.9 in 2000, the kernel prioritizes stability and predictability, often forgoing aggressive optimizations that could introduce exploitable complexity. Process management adheres to POSIX-compliant Unix semantics, handling forking, signaling, and scheduling via traditional mechanisms enhanced by security-focused mitigations. The scheduler supports priority-based preemption and affinity, but tuning favors reliability, such as through conservative thread handling to avoid races uncovered during mandatory code reviews. Hardware abstraction occurs through a layered model where bus interfaces (e.g., , ) abstract platform specifics, yet driver inclusion demands rigorous auditing; proprietary or unvetted code, including blobs, is excluded until ported and verified, limiting support for cutting-edge peripherals in favor of vetted, open-source implementations. The primary file system, Fast File System version 2 (FFS2), builds on Berkeley FFS with soft updates for metadata consistency during crashes and support for quotas, snapshots via dump/restore, and larger block sizes up to 64KB for efficiency on modern storage. Security innovations like randomized PID allocation—assigning non-sequential identifiers from a pool excluding predictable values (e.g., PID 1 for init)—thwart race conditions and information leaks exploitable in PID prediction attacks, forming part of a defense-in-depth strategy without relying on user-space enforcement.

Security Mechanisms

OpenBSD implements privilege separation as a core defense, dividing applications into multiple processes with minimal privileges to limit the impact of compromises. This technique, first developed for in , confines sensitive operations to short-lived privileged processes while unprivileged components handle routine tasks, reducing the attack surface. For instance, the sshd daemon employs privilege separation to isolate and from session handling, ensuring that a vulnerability in the latter does not grant root access. The pledge(2) and unveil(2) system calls provide capability-based restrictions, enabling processes to voluntarily relinquish access to system resources after initialization. Introduced in OpenBSD 5.6 in November 2014, pledge(2) enforces promises that limit syscalls to subsets like "stdio" for I/O or "rpath" for read-only paths, with violations triggering process termination. Unveil(2), added in OpenBSD 6.4 in October 2018, complements this by restricting filesystem visibility to explicitly permitted paths, preventing unauthorized access even if a process retains broader privileges. These mechanisms align with least-privilege principles, as processes call them early to narrow their operational scope, and they are integrated into base system daemons like and ntpd. Memory protections form another foundational layer, including (write XOR execute), which prohibits memory pages from being simultaneously writable and executable to thwart . Enforced since early releases and made strictly mandatory in OpenBSD 6.0 in September 2016, relies on hardware features like the where available. (ASLR), implemented by default since OpenBSD 3.4 in 2003, randomizes the base addresses of the , , libraries, and regions per process invocation, complicating attacks by introducing entropy into memory layouts. and protections, such as non-executable stacks and guard pages, further mitigate buffer overflows, with stack canaries inserted since the early 2000s to detect corruption. Kernel-level runtime monitoring via systrace allowed policy-based interception of syscalls until its removal in OpenBSD 6.0 in favor of pledge(2). Originally introduced around 2003, systrace enabled administrators to define allowlists for system calls, logging or denying violations to contain anomalous behavior. For graphical environments, Xenocara—the OpenBSD-maintained X11 implementation—incorporates privilege separation and pledge(2) to display server processes, isolating client connections and reducing risks from input handling flaws. Cryptographic integrity is bolstered by , a hardened of introduced in OpenBSD 5.5 in October 2014, which removes deprecated APIs, eliminates unused features, and applies rigorous auditing to mitigate vulnerabilities like those exposed in . Signify(1), also debuting in OpenBSD 5.5, provides Ed25519-based signing for releases, patches, and packages, enabling users to verify authenticity without relying on slower RSA or PGP schemes. These tools ensure tamper-evident distribution, with signify keys published openly for independent validation.

Networking and Package Management

OpenBSD's networking stack emphasizes security, reliability, and performance, with (Packet Filter) serving as its core mechanism. Introduced in OpenBSD 3.0 on October 1, 2001, PF enables stateful packet inspection, (NAT), packet normalization, and bandwidth management through a concise rule-based syntax evaluated in kernel space. Filter rules define matching criteria for packets—such as source/destination , ports, and protocols—and specify actions like pass, block, or log, with states tracked to permit return traffic implicitly. This design supports advanced features like interface groups, tables for dynamic IP lists, and , making PF integral to OpenBSD's role in network appliances such as firewalls and routers. The /IP stack has undergone iterative refinements for robustness and efficiency. In OpenBSD 7.8, released on October 21, 2025, the stack was enhanced to process traffic in parallel across multiple CPUs, utilizing up to eight threads per connection while ensuring each connection remains handled by a single thread for consistency. These multi-core optimizations improve throughput on systems without compromising the stack's audited properties, building on prior hardening against attacks like floods and sequence number prediction. Package management in OpenBSD prioritizes verifiable integrity and minimal risk, using a ports tree for compiling software from source and binary packages for convenience. The ports system, mirroring BSD traditions, contains Makefiles, patches, and dependencies for over 11,000 third-party applications as of recent snapshots, allowing users to build tailored binaries with full visibility into compilation. Binary packages, distributed via pkg_add, are pre-compiled on audited builders and signed; updates are conservative, requiring manual intervention to mitigate supply-chain vulnerabilities, unlike automated push models in other distributions. This approach ensures packages track installations for clean removal but avoids unsolicited upgrades, aligning with OpenBSD's code audit ethos. Privilege escalation for package tasks employs , a lightweight utility introduced in OpenBSD 6.6 on September 26, 2019, as a simpler alternative to . Configured via /etc/doas.conf, doas permits specified users to execute commands as root or others with granular rules (e.g., permit nopass :wheel), enforcing minimal dependencies and reducing compared to feature-rich alternatives. Its kernel-backed execution and lack of logging overhead support secure, audited administration in networked environments.

Security Record

Empirical Vulnerabilities and Exploit History

OpenBSD's default installation has exhibited a remarkably low incidence of remotely exploitable vulnerabilities, with the project documenting only two confirmed remote holes since the intensification of security audits around 2002: an in OpenSSH's challenge-response allowing remote code execution (disclosed June 2002, affecting versions up to 3.3) and a in mbuf handling permitting remote code execution (disclosed March 2007, affecting OpenBSD 4.2 and earlier with enabled by default). These incidents prompted immediate errata patches, with the 2002 OpenSSH fix released within days and the 2007 patch integrated into subsequent snapshots. No additional remote code execution vulnerabilities in the default base system—defined as the and essential daemons without user-configured services—have been publicly confirmed in the intervening period through 2025. This empirical scarcity contrasts with higher-profile operating systems, where remote exploits number in the dozens annually; vulnerability databases attribute fewer than 200 CVEs overall to OpenBSD's core components since inception, with high-severity remote issues limited to the aforementioned cases. Rapid response times underpin this record, as evidenced by errata cycles averaging under a week for critical fixes, enabling proactive mitigation before widespread exploitation. Independent audits, such as those by Core Security in 2007, validated the exploits but highlighted OpenBSD's smaller and code hygiene as factors limiting broader classes, like unchecked operations common in un-audited kernels. Causal factors include the project's emphasis on preemptive flaw elimination during development, which has eradicated bug patterns (e.g., certain race conditions and overflows) that recur in larger, less-reviewed codebases, resulting in fewer exploitable remnants reaching production. While third-party components like have occasionally introduced remote risks (e.g., CVE-2023-38408 in 2023, a signal handler issue fixed promptly), these are isolated and do not compromise the base system's default posture. Overall, OpenBSD's track record reflects auditing's empirical efficacy in reducing high-impact vulnerabilities, though absolute remains unattainable, as demonstrated by the rarity of post-2007 disclosures.

Notable Incidents and Investigations

In December 2010, a former U.S. government contractor alleged that the (FBI) had paid OpenBSD developers, including those from a firm contracted for classified work, to insert backdoors into the operating system's implementation around 2000, enabling decryption of encrypted VPN traffic without detection. The claims, detailed in an email to project leader , suggested the backdoors involved subtle modifications to packet reassembly and cryptographic key handling in the stack. OpenBSD promptly initiated an independent code of the historical IPsec codebase, enlisting external experts to review commits from the relevant era. Completed by December 23, 2010, the audit identified two —one permitting potential leakage via malformed packets and another related to improper handling of fragments—but found no substantive evidence of intentional backdoors or unauthorized access mechanisms. In response, the project deprecated and removed the legacy code from the base system in subsequent releases, shifting to user-space alternatives like isakmpd and iked for VPN functionality, while pledging enhanced scrutiny of past contributions. De Raadt publicly affirmed the absence of compromise, attributing the episode to the open-source model's transparency, which allowed rapid verification absent empirical proof of malice. At the 36th Chaos Communication Congress (36C3) on December 29, 2019, independent researcher M. Patrick delivered a talk titled "A Systematic Evaluation of OpenBSD's Mitigations," analyzing the OS's defenses against memory corruption exploits through benchmarks and disassembly. The presentation rated mitigations like W^X (Writexor) and stack canaries as robust but critiqued others, including partial ASLR and pledge(2), for incomplete coverage against techniques such as ROP chains or JIT spraying, based on empirical tests showing bypass feasibility in controlled scenarios. OpenBSD maintainers rebutted aspects of the critique, emphasizing that mitigations form an interdependent layer rather than isolated features, with ongoing refinements—such as MAP_CONCEAL in 2019—driven by audit findings rather than theoretical ideals, and noting the talk's failure to account for holistic exploit difficulty in practice.

Criticisms and Limitations

Critics have challenged OpenBSD's "secure by default" posture, arguing that claims of minimal remote vulnerabilities overlook local exploits and configuration dependencies that undermine default protections. For instance, in December 2019, researchers disclosed multiple high-severity vulnerabilities, including an SSH bypass (CVE-2019-19521) allowing unauthenticated and a local (CVE-2019-19726) enabling root access from a local user, both affecting default installations in versions and 6.6. A systematic presented at the 36th in December 2019 analyzed OpenBSD's mitigations, finding several bypassable or ineffective, such as low-entropy ASLR allowing bypass via a single information leak, delayed enforcement lacking advanced protections like PAX_MPROTECT, and vulnerabilities in rootless Xorg (e.g., CVE-2018-14665 exploitable in OpenBSD 6.4). The analysis concluded that while OpenBSD innovates in areas like pledge and unveil, its mitigations often fall short empirically, attributing gaps to development practices without systematic tools like bug trackers. OpenBSD's emphasis on code auditing and introduces tradeoffs, delaying feature integration and exposing users to unpatched vulnerabilities in base or ports system components. The project's security-first approach results in a lean base system with fewer services enabled by default, but historical inclusions like FTP and HTTP servers have shipped with remote code execution flaws, requiring manual intervention. This conservatism slows adoption of upstream fixes for third-party code, as audits prioritize correctness over timeliness, potentially prolonging exposure in ports-derived packages. Internal limitations include reliability concerns in subsystems like virtual machines and filesystems, contributing to developer attrition. In November 2024, contributor Solene Elzouka announced her departure from the OpenBSD team, citing frequent panics, lockups, and crashes on modern hardware (e.g., Ryzen and ThinkPads) that led to filesystem (FFS) corruption and data loss, rendering it unsuitable for desktop or VM-heavy workloads where performance is limited to single-core headless operation. Her exit sparked discussions on FFS integrity under stress, with users reporting similar instability absent in older hardware. Additionally, project lead Theo de Raadt's confrontational communication style has been criticized for alienating potential contributors and vendors, as noted in accounts of his interactions fostering a high-barrier over collaborative .

Adoption and Impact

Specialized Deployments

OpenBSD finds specialized application in network appliances, particularly as routers and firewalls, where its enables precise traffic filtering, stateful inspection, and on commodity hardware. Configurations typically involve dedicating network interfaces for and separation, with rulesets enforcing deny-by-default policies to mitigate unauthorized access. Such setups support systems in resource-limited environments, including VPN endpoints via integrated for secure tunneling and for site-to-site connectivity, prioritizing auditability over performance in high-security scenarios. In institutional contexts, OpenBSD powers firewalls without proprietary hardware; for example, Suffield Academy deploys standard PCs running OpenBSD and to protect internal networks, citing the operating system's audited and proactive remediation as key to its reliability over two decades. Small enterprises similarly utilize OpenBSD as edge gateways, handling and intrusion prevention with minimal overhead, as evidenced by deployments managing branch office connectivity. For servers, OpenBSD's design emphasizes low maintenance through a stripped-down base system that excludes non-essential services, reducing the while facilitating for custom audits. This suits deployments in network services like DNS resolvers and DHCP servers, where stability and verifiable integrity outweigh feature breadth, as adopted by administrators prioritizing long-term uptime in isolated environments. variants further extend to information appliances, with firms like Envescent secure, purpose-built devices on OpenBSD for and sectors.

General Usage and Statistics

In a survey conducted by the BSD Certification Group among 4330 BSD users, OpenBSD represented approximately 33% of installations, trailing at 77% but ahead of . This positioned OpenBSD as a significant player within the BSD ecosystem at the time, though overall BSD usage remained niche compared to distributions. Contemporary adoption metrics indicate limited penetration in general-purpose . OpenBSD powers less than 0.1% of websites whose operating systems are identifiable, reflecting its marginal presence in web deployments dominated by . Desktop market share statistics similarly show negligible usage, with BSD variants collectively under 0.1% globally, overshadowed by Windows, macOS, and . Corporate utilization, however, demonstrates targeted deployment, with estimates of over 1200 companies employing OpenBSD, particularly those with 50-200 employees and revenues between $1M and $10M. Its components, such as OpenBSD , serve approximately 3000 websites, underscoring niche applications in secure environments. OpenBSD sees greater traction in specialized network appliances and firewalls rather than broad or markets, where 's advantages prevail. End-of-support trackers for general distributions highlight stagnation in mainstream , contrasted by sustained interest in roles.

Barriers to Broader Adoption

OpenBSD's conservative approach to driver integration, emphasizing verifiable open-source and thorough auditing, results in limited support for certain peripherals and devices. The operating system provides no official , as prior implementations were deemed unmaintained and prone to issues, leading developers to prioritize other areas over reimplementation. support remains fractured and incomplete for use, restricting and applications. performance is often mediocre, with user reports in 2024 citing frequent crashes, file corruption, and during operations, attributed to the aging FFS2 filesystem's limited resilience to unclean shutdowns compared to modern alternatives like or . These gaps deter and consumer adoption, as users encounter compatibility hurdles with proprietary like GPUs, where reverse-engineered s lag behind vendor-supported options on . Performance tradeoffs further constrain broader uptake, particularly in multi-core and high-throughput scenarios. Benchmarks consistently show OpenBSD trailing distributions in () scalability and I/O-intensive workloads, such as compiling large codebases or video , due to a design favoring code correctness and audits over aggressive optimization. For instance, Phoronix tests in 2021 demonstrated OpenBSD 7.0 underperforming variants like Clear Linux in tasks by margins exceeding 20% on multi-core systems, a gap persisting into recent releases despite incremental scheduler improvements. The project's deliberate —delaying features until rigorously vetted—prioritizes long-term over immediate speed gains, making it less competitive for performance-critical general-purpose . Governance under project leader contributes to alienation of potential users and contributors. De Raadt's confrontational communication style, often described as abrasive in community discussions, has historically led to commit access revocations and bans in related projects, fostering perceptions of that discourage inclusive . This dynamic, while effective for maintaining a tight-knit, security-focused team, limits influx from diverse developers seeking more welcoming environments, as evidenced by lower contributor growth compared to ecosystems. Such cultural barriers reinforce OpenBSD's niche status, appealing primarily to those tolerant of its uncompromising ethos but repelling broader participation.

Ecosystem

Subprojects and Innovations

OpenSSH, a implementation, originated as a by OpenBSD developers from the OSSH codebase in 1999, coinciding with its inclusion in OpenBSD 2.6. This subproject rapidly gained widespread adoption due to its rigorous auditing process and has been ported as the default SSH client and server to major operating systems including distributions, , and Windows, thereby influencing secure remote access standards across diverse environments. LibreSSL emerged in 2014 as OpenBSD's fork of , prompted by the vulnerability that exposed flaws in the latter's codebase. The initial release on July 11, 2014, prioritized code cleanup, removal of deprecated features, and enhanced auditing for , resulting in a more maintainable library that powers OpenBSD's TLS stack and has been integrated into select third-party projects for improved security isolation. Other notable innovations include the (CARP), developed for failover across multiple hosts to enable high-availability clustering without proprietary dependencies; it was imported in October 2003 and first released in OpenBSD 3.5. relayd, introduced around OpenBSD 4.1, functions as a lightweight daemon for layer-7 load balancing, reverse proxying, and TLS offloading, emphasizing minimal resource use and integrated traffic filtering. systrace, added in 2002 with OpenBSD 3.2, provided policy enforcement to restrict untrusted applications, a mechanism later influencing broader hardening techniques before its in favor of pledge(2). These subprojects demonstrate OpenBSD's emphasis on modular, auditable components that enhance causal outcomes, as evidenced by their porting to , , and variants—such as CARP's adoption in for redundancy and systrace-inspired tracing in other BSDs—which validates the project's principles through empirical cross-platform rather than isolated claims.

Third-Party Components and

The OpenBSD ports system serves as the primary mechanism for integrating third-party software, enabling the compilation and management of dependencies from while producing vetted binary packages for open-source applications. This infrastructure recursively resolves dependencies during the build process, ensuring that external libraries and tools are incorporated without compromising the base 's integrity. However, the project maintains strict policies against including or closed-source components, resulting in a curated selection of ports that excludes software reliant on non-free binaries or blobs. Third-party applications are treated as inherently untrusted, with fixes applied selectively in branches rather than mirroring upstream releases indiscriminately. Hardware compatibility in OpenBSD prioritizes open-source drivers integrated into the , providing robust support for and router environments where standard Ethernet and interfaces predominate. Consumer-grade peripherals, such as adapters, face limitations due to the absence of firmware blobs, with support confined to chipsets like iwx or urtwn that permit open implementation of protocols including WPA2. The project explicitly avoids incorporating vendor-supplied binary drivers into its source tree, enforcing a policy that requires full source availability for auditing and modification, which restricts compatibility with devices demanding closed . This approach enhances through verifiable code but necessitates hardware selection aligned with supported open drivers, often leading users to replace incompatible components like certain cards. Xenocara exemplifies OpenBSD's strategy for graphics compatibility by forking the (based on version 7.7) into a self-contained subsystem tailored for seamless integration with the base system across multiple architectures. This fork minimizes external dependencies and upstream bloat, incorporating necessary components like the , libraries, and utilities while supporting hardware via open drivers such as those for or through modesetting. By maintaining control over the codebase, Xenocara avoids reliance on potentially insecure or bloated upstream updates, prioritizing auditability and stability over feature parity with broader X11 developments.

Licensing and Philosophy

License Framework

OpenBSD's source code is licensed under permissive terms that prioritize broad reusability, primarily utilizing the for original contributions, which grants permission to use, copy, modify, and distribute the software for any purpose, subject to retaining the copyright notice, permission notice, and warranty disclaimer in redistributions. This is functionally equivalent to the two-clause BSD license, omitting redundant language under the while maintaining compatibility with downstream modifications, including proprietary integrations. Some components, particularly libraries and imported code, employ the three-clause BSD license, which adds a prohibition on using the names of contributors for endorsement without prior written permission. The licensing framework eschews mechanisms, such as those in the GNU General Public License, enabling seamless incorporation into closed-source products without reciprocal source disclosure requirements. Core obligations include disclaiming all warranties—express or implied—and limiting liability for damages arising from use, ensuring no implied guarantees of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose. Attribution mandates preservation of original notices in source and binary forms, but permits relicensing derivatives under compatible terms. Historically, OpenBSD's approach derives from the of California's , which transitioned from a four-clause variant—including an advertising requiring acknowledgment in promotional materials—to the revised three-clause form after the clause's rescission on July 22, 1999, to enhance compatibility and reduce administrative burdens. OpenBSD further streamlined this by favoring the for new code since the early 2000s, avoiding GPL-licensed tools in the base system where possible by replacing them with BSD equivalents, such as substituting utilities with native implementations. This permissive model has facilitated the widespread adoption of OpenBSD-derived projects, notably , whose BSD-style licensing allowed integration into diverse ecosystems—including distributions, macOS, and Windows—without the viral obligations of licenses, contributing to its status as the de facto SSH implementation across platforms since its initial in 1999.

Open Source and Documentation Approach

OpenBSD provides unrestricted public access to its complete repository through anonymous CVS, enabling users worldwide to mirror the tree and synchronize with ongoing changes without authentication. This approach, in place since the project's inception, supports transparent development by allowing direct inspection of the full commit history and . While the official repository uses CVS, unofficial mirrors, such as those on , offer alternative cloning options for developers preferring modern tools. The project's documentation strategy centers on manual pages (man pages) as the authoritative reference, prioritizing technical precision, completeness, and machine-readable metadata over user-friendly tutorials or graphical guides. These pages cover system calls, utilities, configuration files, and internals in detail, adhering to standardized formatting that facilitates searching and cross-referencing via tools like apropos(1). This method assumes familiarity with systems, focusing on verifiable facts and options rather than explanatory narratives, which aligns with OpenBSD's emphasis on developer self-reliance and code correctness. Supplementary resources, such as the and handbook, exist but defer to man pages for core details. OpenBSD rejects superficial , ensuring all —including third-party integrations under —is fully auditable and historically traceable, in contrast to projects that release binaries or partial histories while obscuring elements. has occurred "in public" via accessible repositories since 1995, enabling repeated, independent audits by diverse contributors with varying expertise. The project mandates proactive , with vulnerabilities and fixes disclosed transparently through errata and public mailing lists, fostering verifiability over opaque vendor assurances. Contributions are evaluated strictly on technical merit and alignment with code quality standards, with project leader enforcing rigorous standards through direct, unfiltered feedback that prioritizes functional excellence over procedural mandates. This meritocratic culture avoids formal codes of conduct that could introduce non-technical criteria, maintaining focus on auditable outcomes amid resistance to external pressures for equity-based reforms in .

Funding and Sustainability

OpenBSD Foundation and Revenue Sources

The OpenBSD Foundation, incorporated as a Canadian not-for-profit on July 25, 2007, exists to promote the development, advancement, and maintenance of the OpenBSD operating system and associated projects, including and . Its primary role involves soliciting and managing donations to cover operational costs such as infrastructure, hardware acquisitions, and developer gatherings like hackathons. Revenue primarily derives from individual and corporate donations, with annual fundraising campaigns setting specific targets; for example, the 2024 campaign aimed for $350,000 and raised approximately $230,000 by December, including tiered contributions from sponsors like (platinum level, $50,000–$100,000) and (gold level, $25,000–$50,000). Earlier campaigns, such as 2023, generated about $63,000 from donations and legacy PayPal transfers. Corporate support has included past donations from entities like and , though the foundation emphasizes broad community contributions over reliance on any single source. In the early , prior to the foundation's formation, OpenBSD received U.S. government funding from under a $2.3 million grant for security enhancements, which supported full-time salaries for five developers and hardware purchases over two years, but this was abruptly canceled in April 2003 amid controversies over project leader Theo de Raadt's public statements opposing the . Post-2003, funding shifted to private and philanthropic sources, with the foundation facilitating grants for targeted efforts like code audits while the core development remains volunteer-driven, underscoring its dependence on sporadic sponsorships rather than sustained institutional backing. Supplementary income includes sales of merchandise such as installation CDs, stickers, and T-shirts, alongside novelty items like audio CDs featuring developer-composed songs, which serve as lighthearted appeals to the user base. These efforts align with the project's frugal , prioritizing essential expenditures—such as event travel and server maintenance—over expansive operations.

Historical Funding Challenges

In 2003, the OpenBSD project faced a significant funding setback when the U.S. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) abruptly withdrew the remaining portion of a $2.3 million grant allocated for research and development through the University of Pennsylvania's POSSE program. This cancellation, announced by project leader Theo de Raadt, disrupted planned activities including a hackathon in Calgary and forced the team to seek alternative support, highlighting the project's vulnerability to government funding volatility. The decision stemmed from DARPA's concerns over the grant's utilization, though later allegations in 2010 by a former contractor suggested underlying issues related to suspected backdoors in the IPsec stack may have influenced the pullout. By , OpenBSD had accumulated annual losses of approximately $20,000 for the previous two years, underscoring a pattern of operating deficits without stable revenue streams. The project eschewed models, relying instead on sporadic individual and corporate donations, which proved insufficient to cover and operational needs consistently. This approach, while preserving , exposed the team to repeated financial , as evidenced by the lack of diversified mechanisms compared to peers adopting sponsorships or licensing. The most acute crisis occurred in January 2014, when OpenBSD director Bob Beck publicly appealed for funds to cover a CA$20,000 electricity bill for powering development and build servers, warning that failure to secure sustainable support would lead to project shutdown. The appeal garnered pledges totaling around $100,000, including a pivotal $20,000 donation from a source, averting immediate closure but revealing the precarious dependence on ad-hoc contributions. These episodes collectively illustrated the risks of donation-driven sustainability, prompting the eventual formalization of the OpenBSD Foundation, though historical opacity in expenditure details has drawn scrutiny from observers questioning long-term viability without broader transparency.

References

  1. [1]
    OpenBSD
    - **What is OpenBSD**: A FREE, multi-platform 4.4BSD-based UNIX-like operating system emphasizing portability, standardization, correctness, proactive security, and integrated cryptography.
  2. [2]
    What every IT person needs to know about OpenBSD Part 1
    Oct 28, 2021 · OpenBSD came into existence a couple of years later, from a fork of the NetBSD code base in October 1995, with the initial release in July 1996.
  3. [3]
    Introduction | OpenBSD Handbook
    OpenBSD began in 1995 as a fork of NetBSD. The project was founded by Theo de Raadt after his departure from the NetBSD core team. The initial motivation was to ...
  4. [4]
    Innovations - OpenBSD
    OpenBSD innovations include the first free OS with an IPSec stack, first complete IPv6 integration, and first system-wide stack protector.Missing: notable | Show results with:notable
  5. [5]
  6. [6]
    OpenBSD: Security
    **Summary of OpenBSD's Security Approach:**
  7. [7]
    Introduction - Department of Computer Science
    OpenBSD was founded by NetBSD SPARC port lead Theo de Raadt after a disagreement between de Raadt and the core team over future development direction.
  8. [8]
    Theo de Raadt gives it all to OpenBSD - Linux.com
    Jan 30, 2001 · Seems de Raadt, who was asked in December of 1994, by the then remaining core members to resign from his official affiliation with NetBSD ...
  9. [9]
    OpenBSD Turns Eleven
    Oct 19, 2006 · Happy Birthday, OpenBSD! An OpenBSD Timeline. October 18, 1995: OpenBSD CVS repository created. File: [OpenBSD] / src / bin / cat / cat.c ...
  10. [10]
    Commit by Theo de Raadt: Everything is different now with OpenBSD
    Sep 15, 2024 · ... October 18, 1995: OpenBSD. Together with Chuck Cranor, he set up the world's first public and freely usable CVS server with the entry ...
  11. [11]
    Software:OpenBSD version history - HandWiki
    Version, Release date, Supported until, Significant changes. 1.1, 18 October 1995. OpenBSD CVS repository created by Theo de Raadt. While the version number ...
  12. [12]
    Platforms - OpenBSD
    OpenBSD is officially supported on the following platforms. Official support means that the release install media is known to work.
  13. [13]
    OpenBSD history - EgosLike.Us
    Early Days -- v1.2 to 2.2. 1.2 July 1996 -- First FTP release; 2.0 ... June 1, 2001 -- OpenBSD 2.9 released. Code had froze in April. May 18, 2001 ...
  14. [14]
    OpenBSD Operating System (BSD)
    Apr 3, 2004 · Versions. Date - Version. 1995 Oct. - OpenBSD 1.0 1996 Oct. - OpenBSD 2.0 1997 June - OpenBSD 2.1 1997 Dec. - OpenBSD 2.2 1998 May - OpenBSD 2.3
  15. [15]
    OpenBSD 2.0 Changelog
    OpenBSD 2.0 Changelog. This is a partial list of the major machine independent changes (i.e., these are the changes people ask about most often).Missing: October 1 1996 XFree86<|separator|>
  16. [16]
    What every IT person needs to know about OpenBSD Part 2
    Nov 5, 2021 · OpenBSD 2.1 (1997) was the first version to feature IPSEC. The tools ... Since then, privilege separation has been put in place in all ...
  17. [17]
    OpenBSD/sparc
    OpenBSD/sparc runs on most 32bit Sun SPARC workstations, including sun4, sun4c, sun4e, and sun4m, but not 64bit UltraSPARC. The port was discontinued after 5.9.Missing: 1990s Alpha
  18. [18]
    User's Guide - OpenBSD PF
    Packet Filter (from here on referred to as PF) is OpenBSD's system for filtering TCP/IP traffic and doing Network Address Translation.Building a Router · Packet Filtering · Getting Started · Firewall Redundancy (CARP...
  19. [19]
    Project History - OpenSSH
    OpenSSH Project History. In 1999, some OpenBSD developers set to the task of freeing SSH, cleaning up the license mess, and maintaining the codebase towards ...
  20. [20]
    OpenBSD 2.6
    Dec 1, 1999 · OpenSSH was developed by OpenBSD and has been ported to FreeBSD and Linux. A clever trick allows us to distribute the same CD-ROM (USA and ...
  21. [21]
    LibreSSL
    LibreSSL is a version of the TLS/crypto stack forked from OpenSSL in 2014, with goals of modernizing the codebase, improving security, and applying best ...
  22. [22]
    LibreSSL: More Than 30 Days Later - OpenBSD
    Sep 9, 2014 · LibreSSL is a fork of the popular OpenSSL crypto and TLS library. TLS is the standard name for the successor to SSL, that other secure transport protocol ...
  23. [23]
    OpenSSL code beyond repair, claims creator of “LibreSSL” fork
    OpenBSD founder Theo de Raadt has created a fork of OpenSSL, the widely used open source cryptographic software library that contained the notorious Heartbleed ...
  24. [24]
  25. [25]
    OpenBSD 7.8 Changelog
    Add support for the SDHC controllers found on the Raspberry Pi 5. Add bcmstbgpio(4), a driver for the new GPIO controller found on the Raspberry Pi 5.
  26. [26]
    OpenBSD FAQ: Introduction to OpenBSD
    **Summary of OpenBSD Early History and Development (1995-2000):**
  27. [27]
    Theo's page
    Theo de Raadt deraadt@theos.com. I am the founder of OpenBSD -- a freely redistributable 4.4BSD-based operating system with an emphasis on security.
  28. [28]
    Interview: Theo de Raadt of OpenBSD - Linux.com
    Mar 28, 2006 · Theo de Raadt is the project leader for OpenBSD, a Unix-like operating system. We spoke with Theo about the upcoming release of OpenBSD, ...Missing: team structure
  29. [29]
    OpenBSD Developer: Henning Brauer
    At some point you get the commit bit to do it yourself. So to get involved, you just get involved. Fix problems, annoyances, inconsistencies when you encounter ...
  30. [30]
    Mailing Lists - OpenBSD
    Mailing lists are an important means of communication among users and developers of OpenBSD. With the exception of announce, the lists are not moderated.Missing: contributions | Show results with:contributions
  31. [31]
    Code rot & OpenBSD
    Jan 3, 2015 · Each change made to the OpenBSD codebase undergoes a code review before it's committed to the tree. ... It will also tell you the best practices ...Missing: mandatory | Show results with:mandatory
  32. [32]
    OpenBSD Daily, code review, and you
    I made a new years resolution to read at least one C source file from OpenBSD daily. The goal was to both get better at C and to contribute ...
  33. [33]
    [PDF] The real security focused Operating System - CERN Indico
    Sep 30, 2020 · OpenBSD Innovations. • First free operating system to implement a IPSec VPN stack (1997). • Privilege separation: first released with OpenSSH ( ...Missing: early | Show results with:early
  34. [34]
    W^X now mandatory in OpenBSD
    May 27, 2016 · W^X violations are no longer permitted by default. A kernel log message is generated, and mprotect/mmap return ENOTSUP.Missing: audits | Show results with:audits
  35. [35]
    Developing Software in a Hostile Environment - OpenBSD
    Process IDs, pids, are one example. Originally randomized ages ago to prevent predictable PID race conditions, they also helped uncover a bug in libpthread.Malloc. Conf · Recycling · Randomization
  36. [36]
    [PDF] Getting started with OpenBSD device driver development
    Use loadfirmware(8) to load firmware files from /etc/firmware. You need a process context for this. Pay attention to the licence of firmware files! If firmware ...
  37. [37]
    fs(5) - OpenBSD manual pages
    Create and manage the underlying format of file system objects on random access devices (disks). The block size and number of blocks which comprise a file ...
  38. [38]
    [PDF] Cryptography in OpenBSD: An Overview
    In OpenBSD, we use randomized PIDs, with a couple of obvious exceptions, e.g., init(8). RPC transaction IDs (XID). Sun Microsystems Remote Procedure Call.
  39. [39]
    [PDF] Security measures in OpenSSH - OpenBSD
    Privilege separation in OpenSSH has been a great suc- cess; it has reduced the severity of all but one of the memory management bugs found in OpenSSH since ...
  40. [40]
    sshd(8) - OpenBSD manual pages
    The OpenSSH SSH daemon supports SSH protocol 2 only. Each ... chroot(2) directory used by sshd during privilege separation in the pre-authentication phase.
  41. [41]
    pledge(2) - OpenBSD manual pages
    The `pledge()` system call restricts a process to a restricted-service mode, and subsequent calls can further reduce abilities.
  42. [42]
    unveil(2) - OpenBSD manual pages
    Allow path to be created and removed, corresponding to the pledge(2) promise "cpath". A path that is a directory will enable all filesystem access underneath ...
  43. [43]
    [PDF] Kernel W^X Improvements In OpenBSD
    Oct 18, 2014 · W^X is a memory protection policy where memory cannot be both writable and executable. OpenBSD kernel improvements focus on correctness, not ...Missing: introduction | Show results with:introduction
  44. [44]
    OpenBSD PF: Packet Filtering
    Filter rules specify the criteria that a packet must match and the resulting action, either block or pass, that is taken when a match is found. Filter rules are ...
  45. [45]
    OpenBSD Ports: Working with Ports
    ### Summary of Team and Contributions (Focus on Core Team)
  46. [46]
    OpenBSD FAQ: Package Management
    The aim of the package system is to keep track of which software gets installed, so that it may be easily updated or removed.
  47. [47]
    doas(1) - OpenBSD manual pages
    DESCRIPTION. The doas utility executes the given command as another user. The command argument is mandatory unless -C , -L , or -s is specified.Missing: tool | Show results with:tool
  48. [48]
    Historically, what was the first OpenBSD remote hole?
    Jan 8, 2020 · In June 2002, Mark Dowd of Internet Security Systems disclosed a bug in the OpenSSH code implementing challenge-response authentication.Missing: history | Show results with:history
  49. [49]
    [PDF] Core Security: OpenBSD Remote Exploit - Black Hat
    OpenBSD is regarded as a very secure Operating System. This article details one of the few remote exploit against this system. A kernel shellcode is described, ...
  50. [50]
    A second remote hole for OpenBSD - LWN.net
    Mar 14, 2007 · Visitors to the OpenBSD site will notice that it now reads "Only two remote holes in the default install, in more than 10 years!" That's one more than it had a ...Missing: credibility | Show results with:credibility
  51. [51]
    Openbsd : Products and vulnerabilities, CVEs
    This page lists vulnerability statistics for all products of Openbsd. Vulnerability statistics provide a quick overview for security vulnerabilities.
  52. [52]
    OpenBSD's IPv6 mbufs Remote Kernel Buffer Overflow - Core Security
    OpenBSD systems using default installations are vulnerable because the default pre-compiled kernel binary (GENERIC) has IPv6 enabled and OpenBSD's firewall does ...
  53. [53]
    Security - OpenSSH
    This vulnerability was discovered and demonstrated to be exploitable by the Qualys Security Advisory team. This vulnerability has been assigned CVE-2023-38408.
  54. [54]
    Former contractor says FBI put backdoor in OpenBSD - InfoWorld
    Dec 15, 2010 · Backdoor code was allegedly added to the IPsec stack 10 years ago, giving the FBI secret ways to snoop on encrypted traffic.
  55. [55]
    OpenBSD IPSEC backdoored? - LWN.net
    Dec 15, 2010 · I have received a mail regarding the early development of the OpenBSD IPSEC stack. It is alleged that some ex-developers (and the company ...
  56. [56]
    OpenBSD code audit uncovers bugs, but no evidence of backdoor
    Reviews are being conducted on the history and provenance of code in the IPSEC stack as well as the current implementation.Missing: lines | Show results with:lines<|separator|>
  57. [57]
    OpenBSD Project Finds Two Bugs In Software's IPsec Implementation
    Dec 22, 2010 · The OpenBSD project has found two bugs in how OpenBSD, a Unix-like open source operating system, implements Internet protocol security (IPsec).
  58. [58]
    An FBI backdoor in OpenBSD? - CSO Online
    Dec 15, 2010 · A former government contractor has come forward to say that the FBI put a back door in the IPsec stack used by OpenBSD.Missing: team structure governance
  59. [59]
    A systematic evaluation of OpenBSD's mitigations - media.ccc.de
    The goal of this talk is to evaluate how effective OpenBSD's security mitigation are, in a systematic, rational and comprehensive way.
  60. [60]
    Is OpenBSD secure?
    Below are the slides of the A systematic evaluation of OpenBSD's mitigations talk given at the 36c3 the 29th of December 2019.
  61. [61]
    Severe Auth Bypass and Priv-Esc Vulnerabilities Disclosed in ...
    Dec 5, 2019 · OpenBSD, an open-source operating system built with security in mind, has been found vulnerable to four new high-severity security vulnerabilities.Missing: overstated | Show results with:overstated
  62. [62]
    OpenBSD Local Privilege Escalation Vulnerability (CVE-2019-19726)
    Sep 6, 2020 · The vulnerability could allow local users or malicious software to gain full root privileges. OpenBSD developers have confirmed the vulnerability and released ...Missing: audit results<|separator|>
  63. [63]
    [PDF] A systematic evaluation of OpenBSD's mitigations
    ○ February 2019: OpenBSD added MAP_CONCEAL. Ted Unangst said: So the name conceal was chosen to allow some flexibility, like prohibiting ptrace. The idea is ...
  64. [64]
    What security does a default OpenBSD installation offer?
    Feb 15, 2021 · ... Only two remote holes in the default install, in a heck of a long ... Back when OpenBSD was really earning its security reputation, a ...Missing: credibility | Show results with:credibility
  65. [65]
    What are some pros and cons of using OpenBSD instead of Linux?
    Jan 8, 2024 · The security first/secure-by-default mindset in OpenBSD means the core distribution is very locked down. By that I mean there's very little in ...Missing: criticisms | Show results with:criticisms
  66. [66]
    Solene'% : Why I stopped using OpenBSD - dataswamp.org
    Nov 15, 2024 · Running virtual machines on OpenBSD is really limited, running programs headless with one core and poor performance is not a good incentive to ...Missing: exits | Show results with:exits
  67. [67]
    OpenBSD Why I stopped using OpenBSD - DaemonForums
    Aug 14, 2025 · Recently I bought a refurbished HP Elitedesk and on this UEFI system OpenBSD works as reliable as I was accustomed to. I only hate those delays ...Missing: exits VM
  68. [68]
    OpenBSD creator wants users to pressure Intel on open source ...
    Oct 2, 2006 · Known for his abrasive attitude and extremely caustic approach when interacting with vendors, de Raadt typically prefers insults and pressure ...
  69. [69]
    Behavioral standards in the free software community - LWN.net
    Jun 7, 2006 · Even if the debate is framed in terms of personal conduct ("being a jerk"), there's the example of the notoriously abrasive Theo de Raadt to ...
  70. [70]
    Building a Router - OpenBSD PF
    This example will demonstrate how to turn an OpenBSD system into a router that performs the following duties: Two wired em(4) NICs and an athn(4) wireless card ...Missing: specialized appliances
  71. [71]
    Build a Simple Router and Firewall | OpenBSD Handbook
    This chapter describes how to configure OpenBSD as a small router and firewall using two network interfaces: one WAN interface that connects to the Internet ...
  72. [72]
    Embedded OpenBSD - Introduction - Kernel Panic
    The basic tools we will use are: OpenBSD: the secure by default operating system, particularly well suited for "ultra-light" installations and security-critical ...Missing: infrastructure | Show results with:infrastructure
  73. [73]
    Firewall (OpenBSD PF) - Suffield Academy Web
    Oct 28, 2008 · Rather than using specialized hardware for a firewall, we use commodity PCs running the OpenBSD operating system. OpenBSD has a long track ...
  74. [74]
    Is anyone else using OpenBSD as a router in the enterprise? What ...
    Jun 29, 2009 · For my father's small business with one branch office, I use OpenBSD as the router/gateway/firewall for both the main and branch office. It has ...Missing: appliances | Show results with:appliances
  75. [75]
    How to Win with OpenBSD
    Apr 1, 2008 · Emphasize on the low costs of running OpenBSD. The low maintenance, the fact it performs great without cutting-edge hardware. Do not say it ...
  76. [76]
    Why Did I Use OpenBSD for My Remote File Server
    Feb 18, 2024 · OpenBSD is a free and open-source, security-focused Unix-like operating system based on the Berkeley Software Distribution (BSD).
  77. [77]
    Support and Consulting - OpenBSD
    OpenBSD has attracted a critical mass of developers, support organizations and consultants such that it is now safe to commit to using OpenBSD in your projects.Missing: core | Show results with:core
  78. [78]
    The State of Enterprise Unix | ServerWatch
    Dec 13, 2006 · The BSD Certification Group published a usage report estimating OpenBSD adoption at about 33 percent. The majority of BSD users continue to ...
  79. [79]
  80. [80]
    Usage statistics of OpenBSD for websites - W3Techs
    OpenBSD is used by less than 0.1% of all the websites whose operating system we know. The diagram shows the percentage of websites using OpenBSD as operating ...
  81. [81]
    Companies using OpenBSD and its marketshare - Enlyft
    1240 companies use OpenBSD. OpenBSD is most often used by companies with 50-200 employees & $1M-10M in revenue. Our usage data goes back 10 years.Missing: statistics | Show results with:statistics
  82. [82]
    Companies using OpenBSD httpd - WebTechSurvey
    Technology usage statistics ; Websites using OpenBSD httpd: 2,967 websites ; Most popular in: Germany ; Market position in Web Servers category: #43 ; Market share ...
  83. [83]
    Why isn't OpenBSD more widely used? I only know what I read ...
    While it's possible to use OpenBSD as a general purpose server or desktop, that's not where it's strength lies. It tends to excel as a firewall or router.Missing: statistics | Show results with:statistics
  84. [84]
    OpenBSD, the computer appliance maker's secret weapon
    Jun 5, 2024 · If only there were a freely-usable set of Unix-like operating systems, with an emphasis on keeping things very, very stable over releases, even ...Missing: adoption general
  85. [85]
    Will My X Hardware work on OpenBSD? If X=Nvidia, then no. Other ...
    Nov 3, 2024 · There's no bluetooth support currently. Not because of security issues, but because when we last had bluetooth, it was unmaintained and a mess.I often get frustrated to hear that "OpenBSD is hard", or that "its super ...Interested in the *BSD on homePC, have questions - RedditMore results from www.reddit.comMissing: limitations | Show results with:limitations
  86. [86]
    Why I stopped using OpenBSD - OSnews
    Nov 20, 2024 · If anything 113 is tiny, in terms of active core developers for FreeBSD, given how some major commercial products (PS5 et al) are based on it.
  87. [87]
    Why I stopped using OpenBSD - Lobste.rs
    Nov 20, 2024 · Every time OpenBSD crash, and it happens very often for me when using it as a desktop, it ends with file corrupted or lost files. This is just ...Missing: exits | Show results with:exits
  88. [88]
    OpenBSD vs Linux classic comparison between two Unix-like ...
    May 27, 2025 · Look at both systems, highlighting architecture, development model, licensing, package management, administration, and typical use cases.<|control11|><|separator|>
  89. [89]
    Benchmarks: FreeBSD 13 vs. NetBSD 9.2 vs. OpenBSD 7 ... - Phoronix
    Dec 10, 2021 · Here is a look at how DragonFlyBSD 6.0.1, FreeBSD 13.0, NetBSD 9.2, and OpenBSD 7.0 are competing against various Linux distributions like CentOS, Clear Linux, ...
  90. [90]
    Is OpenBSD actually slow or inefficient? - Reddit
    Feb 14, 2021 · OpenBSD does not win benchmarks, but it's not unusably slow. If pure speed is what you want, OpenBSD will most likely lose to Linux.Linux vs BSD, the difference? Free or OpenBSD? - RedditIs OpenBSD slower than other BSD derivatives especially when it ...More results from www.reddit.com
  91. [91]
    OpenBSD Moderation Removal by NetBSD Team - OSnews
    In a nutshell, Theo threatened to set up mailbomb the NetBSD and FreeBSD servers. To make such a written threat, he obviously didn't really care if he was “ ...Missing: expulsion | Show results with:expulsion
  92. [92]
    the gatekeeping implied here [...] is really toxic It's Theo de Raadt ...
    the gatekeeping implied here [...] is really toxic. It's Theo de Raadt, toxic rhetoric is sort of his brand. But... he has a real point here.Missing: criticism alienation contributors
  93. [93]
    Theo De Raadt always complained that many of the institutions that ...
    Apr 29, 2015 · Theo De Raadt always complained that many of the institutions that run and use OpenBSD don't contribute back. Good to see the EU at least ...Missing: team structure governance
  94. [94]
    for OpenBSD - OpenSSH
    OpenSSH for OpenBSD. Since OpenSSH is developed by the OpenBSD group, OpenSSH is included in the base operating system, starting at OpenBSD release 2.6.Missing: history | Show results with:history
  95. [95]
    Releases - LibreSSL
    LibreSSL 2.0.0 (Jul 11, 2014) - First LibreSSL release, based on OpenBSD 5.6 development snapshot.
  96. [96]
    relayd(8) - OpenBSD manual pages
    A relay represents a layer 7 load-balancing instance. Each instance translates to a listening TCP or UDP port. A protocol defines which actions, if any, are ...
  97. [97]
    ports(7) - OpenBSD manual pages
    DESCRIPTION. The OpenBSD Ports Collection is the infrastructure used to create binary packages for third party applications. For normal usage refer to packages( ...
  98. [98]
    1 - The OpenBSD ports system
    When a user issues make(1) in the subdirectory of a specific port, the system will recursively walk its dependency tree, check whether the required dependencies ...
  99. [99]
    Testing Guide - OpenBSD Ports
    The ports tree is a huge piece of work that permits OpenBSD users to use third party programs without wasting time patching, configuring and installing each one ...Missing: software | Show results with:software
  100. [100]
    [OpenBSD] Which ports are secure? - DaemonForums
    Jun 11, 2020 · All third party programs are considered to be untrusted by the Project as a matter of policy, and, also untrusted as a matter of process. See ...Keeping OpenBSD -stable packages up to dateAnother Perl question... - OpenBSDMore results from daemonforums.org
  101. [101]
    OpenBSD FAQ: Networking
    Network configuration in OpenBSD is done with text files in /etc. Typically, these settings are initially configured during the installation process.Network Configuration · Identifying and Setting Up... · Dynamic Host Configuration...Missing: stack | Show results with:stack
  102. [102]
    iwx(4) - OpenBSD manual pages
    The iwx driver can be configured to use Wired Equivalent Privacy (WEP) or Wi-Fi Protected Access (WPA1 and WPA2). ... The driver will reset the hardware.
  103. [103]
    urtwn(4) - OpenBSD manual pages
    The urtwn driver can be configured to use Wired Equivalent Privacy (WEP) or Wi-Fi Protected Access (WPA1 and WPA2). ... The driver will reset the hardware.
  104. [104]
    wifi cards : solution to get them working? - DaemonForums
    Aug 25, 2022 · If you really want to run OpenBSD, I would swap out the wifi card on one of the laptops.
  105. [105]
    Xenocara
    Xenocara is the name chosen for the version of X included in OpenBSD. It is currently based on X.Org 7.7 and its dependencies.Missing: X11 | Show results with:X11
  106. [106]
    [PDF] Xenocara - integrating X.Org in OpenBSD
    Feb 24, 2007 · Xenocara aims at answering those questions: X will not move to the ports tree,. Re-use ideas from ports to drive the autotools builds with make ...Missing: hardening | Show results with:hardening
  107. [107]
    What are comparisons of Xenocara with Xorg, and perhaps Wayland
    Nov 30, 2023 · In a nutshell, Xenocara is "just" OpenBSD's fork of Xorg which aims to integrate it smoothly with OpenBSD base. It isn't meant as a standalone ...Closed - What Would You Like to See FreeBSD Do Differently?HardenedBSD the system new more secure of world after OpenBSD?More results from forums.freebsd.orgMissing: hardening | Show results with:hardening
  108. [108]
    Copyright Policy - OpenBSD
    OpenBSD aims for code that can be freely used, copied, modified, and distributed, based on the Berkeley copyright, with minimal conditions.
  109. [109]
  110. [110]
    Release Notes - OpenSSH
    OpenSSH is a 100% complete SSH protocol 2.0 implementation and includes sftp client and server support. Once again, we would like to thank the OpenSSH community ...
  111. [111]
    OpenBSD Anonymous CVS
    Anonymous CVS is a method of keeping your local copy of the OpenBSD source tree up to date with respect to changes made to current OpenBSD sources.
  112. [112]
    OpenBSD Mirror / src - GitLab
    Mar 20, 2024 · Read-only git conversion of OpenBSD's official CVS "src" repository. Pull requests not accepted - send diffs to the tech@ mailing list.Missing: access | Show results with:access
  113. [113]
    OpenBSD FAQ: Building the System from Source
    Building OpenBSD from source involves a number of steps. This FAQ section is intended to help you with the necessary preparation.Missing: mandatory | Show results with:mandatory
  114. [114]
    man(1) - OpenBSD manual pages
    The `man` command displays manual pages. Pages can be selected by category or architecture, or searched using `-k` with apropos(1).Missing: approach | Show results with:approach
  115. [115]
    Solene'% : Why is the OpenBSD documentation so good?
    Aug 18, 2022 · The manual pages are literally the core of the OpenBSD documentation, they follow some standard and contains much metadata in it. When you write ...
  116. [116]
    What every IT person needs to know about OpenBSD
    Sep 30, 2021 · LibreSSL is the result of a group of OpenBSD developers taking the existing OpenSSL code and starting to fix it. This time it was not a matter ...<|separator|>
  117. [117]
  118. [118]
    OpenBSD foundation announced - nixCraft
    Jul 26, 2007 · The OpenBSD Foundation is pleased to announce today it has completed its organization as a Canadian federal non-profit corporation and is ready ...
  119. [119]
    The OpenBSD Foundation
    The Foundation needs contributions from Individuals and Companies to support its efforts. Please see our Donations Page for information on how to contribute.Donations · Our Bylaws · Membership · ActivitiesMissing: sources sponsors
  120. [120]
    Donate to the OpenBSD Foundation
    The Foundation's fund raising activities for 2024 are now complete. 2023. The ... donations from the Old OpenBSD PayPal for a total of $62,949 in revenue.
  121. [121]
    Donate to the OpenBSD Foundation
    2024 Fundraising Campaign · Iridium: $100,000 and above. Total from smaller donors · Platinum: $50,000 to $100,000. Google · Gold: $25,000 to $50,000. Microsoft ...
  122. [122]
  123. [123]
    Update: DARPA pulls funding for OpenBSD - InfoWorld
    Apr 18, 2003 · Theo de Raadt, leader of the OpenBSD project, said he found out Thursday that the remaining funding had been pulled on a $2.3 million Portable ...Missing: sponsors | Show results with:sponsors
  124. [124]
    DARPA pulls funding for OpenBSD, leader says - Network World
    Apr 18, 2003 · Theo de Raadt, leader of the OpenBSD project, said he found out Thursday that the remaining funding had been pulled on a $2.3 million Portable ...Missing: sponsors | Show results with:sponsors
  125. [125]
    Donate to the OpenBSD Foundation
    The OpenBSD foundation exists as a place where donations can be made to further OpenBSD, OpenSSH, and related software projects.Missing: sponsors | Show results with:sponsors
  126. [126]
    Donations - OpenBSD
    No information is available for this page. · Learn whyMissing: revenue sources sponsors<|separator|>
  127. [127]
    DARPA pulls OpenBSD funding - Ars Technica
    Apr 18, 2003 · The US Defense Department's funding agency for R&D has pulled the remainder of a $2.3 Million grant for OpenBSD researchers to improve the ...
  128. [128]
    FBI accused of planting backdoor in OpenBSD IPSEC stack
    Dec 15, 2010 · “It is alleged that some ex-developers (and the company they worked for) accepted US government money to put backdoors into our network stack,” ...Missing: 2002 DHS
  129. [129]
    OpenBSD finances
    Mar 21, 2006 · To fulfill most development goals OpenBSD should be generating about $100K USD. With that amount of money the project can finance 1 large and 4 ...
  130. [130]
    'Re: Request for Funding our Electricity' - MARC
    ... Funding our Electricity From: Bob Beck <beck () openbsdfoundation ! org> ... costs. But the fact is right now, OpenBSD will shut down if we do not have ...Missing: appeal | Show results with:appeal
  131. [131]
    OpenBSD rescued from unpowered oblivion by $20K bitcoin donation
    Jan 20, 2014 · The project was facing a serious, perhaps even crippling setback due to the $20,000 cost of powering its development and build machines. The ...
  132. [132]
    WHEW! OpenBSD won't CloseBSD (for now) after $100,000 cash ...
    Jan 22, 2014 · The Foundation has had pledges of "around" $100,000 from individuals and organisations following its appeal to cover a $20,000 server ...Missing: costs | Show results with:costs