I assume the dues are tied to the estate of the person.

They're reclaiming it from the inheritance which should not have been passed down.

Dedupes client side.

You're with the NSA, right?

The TSA will just love that.

Shame about that child stepping out in front of you.

I have my own domains and do this with tunnelled rsync to a NAS4Free box, though for long term storage I like SpiderOak (and TarSnap). SpiderOak keeps historical versions and dedupes the data.

Try SpiderOak. Free 2 GB, zero-knowledge, secure. Works on a load of OSs and devices.

I'm a completely satisfied customer.

Just a minor correction - my piece does indeed suggest that the OpenSSL developers have some strange priorities. However, it lays the larger blame at the companies that used OpenSSL, when all the information necessary to suggest that this kind of thing could happen was already available, and the potential consequences for larger companies of a breach are easily enough to justify throwing a little money at the problem (which could have been used any number of ways to help prevent this).

I think we need to take a serious look at the "many eyes" theory because of this. Apparently, there were no eyes on the part of parties that did not wish to exploit the bug for close to two years. And wasn't there just a professional audit by Red Hat that caught another bug, but not this one?

I have to say I'm even less confident in the plan to couple it to DNSSEC.

Sure. We're better. But we need to be even better than that.

I'd say more than just the "community". We have a great many companies that incorporate this software and generate billions from the sales of applications or services incorporating it, without returning anything to its maintenance.I think it's a sensible thing to ask Intuit, for example: "What did you pay to help maintain OpenSSL?". And then go down the list of companies.

Theo de Raadt should fork OpenSSL. He could call it OpenOpenSSL.

.

OK guys. We've promoted Open Source for decades. We have to own up to our own problems.

This was a failure in the Open Source process. It is just as likely to happen to closed source software, and more likely to go unrevealed if it does, which is why we aren't already having our heads handed to us.

But we need to look at whether Open Source projects should be providing the world's security without any significant funding to do so.

... it's kind of like a Chinese Snopes, except you go to jail rather than being unfriended.