Slashdot Mirror


FreeBSD Jails

BSD Forums writes "A common security breach involves exploiting one application to gain access to another. Keeping separate applications separate can limit the potential damage. OnLamp's Mike DeGraw-Bertsch explains how FreeBSD's jails can help secure necessary applications."

70 comments

  1. Stolen from SCO by Mr.+Darl+McBride · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    As far as I know Windows has had native support for Java for ages. Actually since Microsoft and Sun signed an agreement about this back in 1997 that deals with this issue. So the fact that FreeBSD got this is fine but not exactly revolutionary.

  2. primul post pentru dandan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    i will go to jail for this

  3. Sir by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    BSD is totally, completely and utterly dead.

    I'm so sorry sir.

  4. If my brother goes to jail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    ill follow him in
    btw, I have something to show you my brother
    dan

  5. FUCK BSD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    People who use *BSD are complete faggots. If their computer had an ass and a penis, they'd probably fuck it.

  6. Developer laments: What Killed FreeBSD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic
    The End of FreeBSD

    [ed. note: in the following text, former FreeBSD developer Mike Smith gives his reasons for abandoning FreeBSD]

    When I stood for election to the FreeBSD core team nearly two years ago, many of you will recall that it was after a long series of debates during which I maintained that too much organisation, too many rules and too much formality would be a bad thing for the project.

    Today, as I read the latest discussions on the future of the FreeBSD project, I see the same problem; a few new faces and many of the old going over the same tired arguments and suggesting variations on the same worthless schemes. Frankly I'm sick of it.

    FreeBSD used to be fun. It used to be about doing things the right way. It used to be something that you could sink your teeth into when the mundane chores of programming for a living got you down. It was something cool and exciting; a way to spend your spare time on an endeavour you loved that was at the same time wholesome and worthwhile.

    It's not anymore. It's about bylaws and committees and reports and milestones, telling others what to do and doing what you're told. It's about who can rant the longest or shout the loudest or mislead the most people into a bloc in order to legitimise doing what they think is best. Individuals notwithstanding, the project as a whole has lost track of where it's going, and has instead become obsessed with process and mechanics.

    So I'm leaving core. I don't want to feel like I should be "doing something" about a project that has lost interest in having something done for it. I don't have the energy to fight what has clearly become a losing battle; I have a life to live and a job to keep, and I won't achieve any of the goals I personally consider worthwhile if I remain obligated to care for the project.

    Discussion

    I'm sure that I've offended some people already; I'm sure that by the time I'm done here, I'll have offended more. If you feel a need to play to the crowd in your replies rather than make a sincere effort to address the problems I'm discussing here, please do us the courtesy of playing your politics openly.

    From a technical perspective, the project faces a set of challenges that significantly outstrips our ability to deliver. Some of the resources that we need to address these challenges are tied up in the fruitless metadiscussions that have raged since we made the mistake of electing officers. Others have left in disgust, or been driven out by the culture of abuse and distraction that has grown up since then. More may well remain available to recruitment, but while the project is busy infighting our chances for successful outreach are sorely diminished.

    There's no simple solution to this. For the project to move forward, one or the other of the warring philosophies must win out; either the project returns to its laid-back roots and gets on with the work, or it transforms into a super-organised engineering project and executes a brilliant plan to deliver what, ultimately, we all know we want.

    Whatever path is chosen, whatever balance is struck, the choosing and the striking are the important parts. The current indecision and endless conflict are incompatible with any sort of progress.

    Trying to dissect the above is far beyond the scope of any parting shot, no matter how distended. All I can really ask of you all is to let go of the minutiae for a moment and take a look at the big picture. What is the ultimate goal here? How can we get there with as little overhead as possible? How would you like to be treated by your fellow travellers?

    Shouts

    To the Slashdot "BSD is dying" crowd - big deal. Death is part of the cycle; take a look at your soft, pallid bodies and consider that right this very moment, parts of you are dying. See? It's not so bad.

    To the bulk of the FreeBSD committerbase and the developer community at large - keep your eyes on the real goals. I

  7. sandbox by Hard_Code · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Instead of this adhoc-ish system, wouldn't a better solution be to have a "correct" sandbox in which a policy can be attached to ANY process, which determined what kernel calls can be made, and potentially with what parameters? Then there is no need for wacky interface aliasing and stuff like that.

    --

    It's 10 PM. Do you know if you're un-American?
    1. Re:sandbox by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      how good is that? I mean, open and write could be used to add another entry to the /etc/passwd file, but many applications have legitimate reasons to write to disk. Maybe a better answer is to write better code to begin with.

    2. Re:sandbox by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's CerbNG

    3. Re:sandbox by ctr2sprt · · Score: 4, Informative
      No, not really. The problem with all these fine-grained access controls is that they are painfully difficult to use. Unix admins get worked up about the complexity introduced by simple POSIX filesystem ACLs, how do you think they'll be able to tolerate having per-process syscall control? It would just never get used. Incidentally, they are patches which allow exactly the functionality you describe. And nobody uses them except for people with a really exceptional need for security.

      Jails have other uses too, by the way. Website hosting is one such example. You can set up jails for each person using the machine, and then he gets his own root login. He can modify Apache config files himself and do any other configuration stuff, but he can't break out of the jail to interfere with other users. There are actually providers out there that do this, though I don't know any of them by name.

    4. Re:sandbox by delfstrom · · Score: 2, Informative
      There are actually providers out there that do this, though I don't know any of them by name
      JohnCompanies is one such host that uses FreeBSD jails to give you your own root and ports tree.
    5. Re:sandbox by Nothinman · · Score: 1

      You mean like systrace?

    6. Re:sandbox by ehrichweiss · · Score: 1

      Sandbox, that's exactly what I was gonna say. Why the idea of the sandbox never caught on earlier I'll never know. I don't know if the concept had been introduced at the time but while emulating a Wintel machine on an Amiga(anyone remember those?:) the idea hit me that "memory management" could be easily implemented by setting memory limits, etc. per process as the emulator was doing for the PC processes.

      --
      0x09F911029D74E35BD84156C5635688C0
  8. What a little birdie told me about *BSD... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    1. You can not play games on it.
    2. It cannot be used by my grandma.
    3. It lacks a GUI of any note.
    4. There is no support available for it.
    5. It is an assortment of fragmented OSes.
    6. It cannot be run on the x86 platform.
    7. You have to compile everything and know C.
    8. Support for the latest hardware is always poor.
    9. It is incompatiable with GNU/Linux.
    10.It is dying.

  9. bind? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    why do the various freebsds (and linux distros) ship with bind and sendmail for dns/smtp?


    Let's be honest - those 2 pieces of software are responsible for more root exploits (remote and local) than anything else.


    And better alternatives exist - like qmail and djbdns. Is there any reason to run those pieces of shit besides legacy config files?

    1. Re:bind? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And better alternatives exist - like qmail and djbdns.

      And when they have all the features of sendmail 8.12.9 and bind 9.2.2 than they are an alternative.

      Until then, qmail/djbdns is not an alternative.

    2. Re:bind? by m0rten · · Score: 4, Interesting
      And better alternatives exist - like qmail and djbdns. Is there any reason to run those pieces of shit besides legacy config files?

      To quote the Makefile for /usr/ports/mail/qmail:

      NO_PACKAGE= djb's packaging license does not allow non-standard qmail binary distributions

      I would guess this is a big showstopper for using qmail in the FreeBSD basesystem. However, I think it was recently added some glue to sysinstall to let you choose MTA during install.

    3. Re:bind? by xA40D · · Score: 4, Interesting

      And better alternatives exist

      In your opinion. Personally I dislike sendmail, but love BIND (just don't run it as root). But then I dislike qmail as much as sendmail, and djbdns strikes me as mildly braindamaged - so I'd hate to see them installed by default.

      An ideal system would have the entire OS as packages... then all you need to do in to install your favourites....

      --
      Do you mind, your karma has just run over my dogma.
    4. Re:bind? by sirket · · Score: 1

      djbdns strikes me as mildly braindamaged

      "mildly braindamaged"?!?! djbdns is a case of full on dementia. qmail is equally brain damaged. The log files are downright useless (in my opinion) and the configuration makes me want to shoot myself.

      Exim and Postfix are so superior to qmail in terms of manageability that it is embarrassing to qmail.

      But then again these are just my opinions.

      -sirket

    5. Re:bind? by cperciva · · Score: 1

      The log files are extremely useful. They're just not designed for human processing. Similarly, the configuration files aren't very human-friendly, but they are very easy to manipulate via scripts.

      Anyway, if qmail's configuration makes you want to shoot yourself... what does *Sendmail's* configuration do?

    6. Re:bind? by yerricde · · Score: 1

      What, specifically, can Sendmail do that Postfix cannot?

      --
      Will I retire or break 10K?
    7. Re:bind? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Sendmail can give me remote root access.


      J. Scriptkiddy

    8. Re:bind? by ericesposito · · Score: 1, Funny

      Allow script kiddies to root your box.

    9. Re:bind? by rsax · · Score: 1
      An ideal system would have the entire OS as packages... then all you need to do in to install your favourites....

      Hey sort of like these operating systems ;)

    10. Re:bind? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      postfix can do that too, it just takes a lot more effort, and a brain dead configuration.

    11. Re:bind? by sirket · · Score: 1

      Anyway, if qmail's configuration makes you want to shoot yourself... what does *Sendmail's* configuration do?

      It doesn't do anything to me... I refuse to use it :)

      -sirket

    12. Re:bind? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about ships with a software licence that is smaller and eaiser to understand, not to mention doesn't void over patents?

      At least neither one is GPLed.

    13. Re:bind? by caulfield · · Score: 1

      i've always liked maradns since it's not "braindamaged" like djbdns, but it does priviledge separation to run in a jail.

  10. how ironic... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    ... that michael posts a story about jails. For those that dont know, last year Michael was arrested and spent a night or two in jail for DUI with a suspended license.

    1. Re:how ironic... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

      Yep, thats where I aquired the taste for big black cocks in my anus.

      love,
      Michael

  11. *BSD is dying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll
    Fact: *BSD is dying

    It is common knowledge that *BSD is dying, that ever hapless *BSD is mired in an irrecoverable and mortifying tangle of fatal trouble. It is perhaps anybody's guess as to which *BSD is the worst off of an admittedly suffering *BSD community. The numbers continue to decline for *BSD but FreeBSD may be hurting the most. Look at the numbers. The loss of user base for FreeBSD continues in a head spinning downward spiral.

    OpenBSD leader Theo states that there are 7000 users of OpenBSD. How many users of BSD are there? Let's see. The number of OpenBSD versus NetBSD posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 NetBSD users. BSD/OS posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of NetBSD posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of BSD/OS. A recent article put FreeBSD at about 80 percent of the *BSD market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 FreeBSD users. This is consistent with the number of FreeBSD Usenet posts.

    Due to the troubles of Walnut Creek, abysmal sales and so on, FreeBSD went out of business and was taken over by BSDI who sell another troubled OS. Now BSDI is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.

    All major marketing surveys show that *BSD has steadily declined in market share. *BSD is extremely sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If *BSD is to survive at all it will be among hobbyist dilettante dabblers. In truth, for all practical purposes *BSD is already dead. It is a dead man walking.

    Fact: *BSD is dying

  12. Slow news today? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    jails have been available since what, 3.0-REL? jails are useless if ports are not updated to have them being installed in a jail as an option. OpenBSD comes with apache and bind9 chrooted by default. Btw, the worst part is that the jail code was developed by Poul-Henning, so forget about having patches accepted by him. Fuck you Poul.

    Astro Glass

    1. Re:Slow news today? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      make install DESTDIR=

  13. Jails addons by rf0 · · Score: 4, Informative

    For some fun jail patches have a look at garage.freebsd.pl

    Rus

  14. Elegy for *BSD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    Elegy For *BSD


    I am a *BSD user
    and I try hard to be brave
    That is a tall order
    *BSD's foot is in the grave.

    I tap at my toy keyboard
    and whistle a happy tune
    but keeping happy's so hard,
    *BSD died so soon.

    Each day I wake and softly sob
    Nightfall finds me crying
    Not only am I a zit faced slob
    but *BSD is dying.

  15. Fucking Trolls by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    When these fucking trolls will stop to send this messages?

    1. Re:Fucking Trolls by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When you to be taking grammar lessions?

    2. Re:Fucking Trolls by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      lessions?
      methinks the grandfather poster is a native german speaker who translated word for word. Of course I could be wrong - he could be dutch or flemish.

  16. systrace by bikepunk · · Score: 2, Informative
    1. Re:systrace by cant_get_a_good_nick · · Score: 1

      Not to start a TdR flamewar, but wasn't systrace targetted for OpenBSD, they got in a snit with TdR so first got put into NetBSD?

  17. nore on jails by nerdsv650 · · Score: 3, Informative

    Nice intro. I've been running jails on FreeBSD for some time now, here are some additional notes I put together some time back.

    http://www.xyz.com/notes/jailnotes.html

    Hope this helps someone.

    -michael

    1. Re:nore on jails by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

      Bsd is dying. M'kay?

    2. Re:nore on jails by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      xyz.com.. nice :)

  18. CmdrTaco's Anus Confirms: BSD IS DEAD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll
    It is now official - Netcraft has confirmed: *BSD is dying

    Yet another crippling bombshell hit the beleaguered *BSD community when recently IDC confirmed that *BSD accounts for less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of the latest Netcraft survey which plainly states that *BSD has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. *BSD is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last [samag.com] in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.

    You don't need to be a Kreskin [amazingkreskin.com] to predict *BSD's future. The hand writing is on the wall: *BSD faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for *BSD because *BSD is dying. Things are looking very bad for *BSD. As many of us are already aware, *BSD continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood. FreeBSD is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core developers. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time FreeBSD developers Jordan Hubbard and Mike Smith only serve to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: FreeBSD is dying.

    Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.

    OpenBSD leader Theo states that there are 7000 users of OpenBSD. How many users of NetBSD are there? Let's see. The number of OpenBSD versus NetBSD posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 NetBSD users. BSD/OS posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of NetBSD posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of BSD/OS. A recent article put FreeBSD at about 80 percent of the *BSD market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 FreeBSD users. This is consistent with the number of FreeBSD Usenet posts.

    Due to the troubles of Walnut Creek, abysmal sales and so on, FreeBSD went out of business and was taken over by BSDI who sell another troubled OS. Now BSDI is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.

    All major surveys show that *BSD has steadily declined in market share. *BSD is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If *BSD is to survive at all it will be among OS hobbyist dabblers. *BSD continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, *BSD is dead.

    Fact: *BSD is dead

  19. pity they can't have private namespaces by F2F · · Score: 3, Informative

    we have them in Plan 9. and they've been there for the past 14 years -- each user, each process, each device exists in its own namespace and views the system differently.

    my / != your /

    after years and years of trying maybe it's time you guys really do something about it -- jails are a temporary solution, and not a very good one at that.

    you need full private namespaces for the same reason you need local variables in your programs -- it's just too nasty otherwise.

    1. Re:pity they can't have private namespaces by cperciva · · Score: 3, Informative

      DragonFlyBSD is supposed to be getting something like this; each process only sees its own version of shared libraries.

  20. Does Linux offer something like this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    FreeBSD's jails are a very cool security feature in my mind. Does Linux offer something similar?

    1. Re:Does Linux offer something like this? by ocelotbob · · Score: 1

      In addition to chroot, Linux also offers User mode Linux which is like a supermaximum security jail call. Or, you can go to MAC/RBAC systems such as grsecurity.

      --

      Marxism is the opiate of dumbasses

    2. Re:Does Linux offer something like this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      Actually, UML is not a supermaximum, it may be considered a supermaximum chroot, but in fact, it's much worse than the FreeBSD jail functionality.

      1. For each UML you have another kernel stealing memory, FreeBSD just uses one kernel.

      2. UML uses loopback on fs, which is really really slow, it also means that if you have multilevel "jails" you soon get practically zero performance; with FreeBSD this does not happen.

      In all fairness, UML is great if you want to test your programs for a multitude of different kernels on the same machine, but for everything else the FreeBSD jail is superior.

      So in the end, if you play with kernels the UML is really great and FreeBSD *should* consider offer something similar. For real world use jail is the thing.

    3. Re:Does Linux offer something like this? by axxackall · · Score: 1
      Both (1) and (2) are the price for a higher level of security of the system overall comparing to FreeBSD's jail.

      However, when you don't need THAT level of isolation I would conside Plan-9's private namespaces, whose fine-grained control is far more superior to jail.

      --

      Less is more !
    4. Re:Does Linux offer something like this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      UML does _NOT_ offer any more security than jail, you can break out of a jail if there is a kernel exploit, but so you can with UML too, so it's a moot point.

      Yes, namespaces are dandy, and the BSD's will get then in about 1 year from now as it is being worked on.

  21. Bob Hope and BSD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait
    It is with a heavy heart that we must report that Bob "I'm still dead" Hope has gone on to join the "B" team. As you all may know, BSD has been part of the "B" team for quite some time.

    The Year of Our Lord 2003 has been a particularly bad year for the "B"s,

    • Bob Hope
    • Buddy Ebsen
    • Buddy Hackett
    • Barry White
    • BSD
    This honored list of dead is but a small token of adieu from the many fans of the deceased.
    These dead were truly some American Icons. They will be missed.
  22. The *BSD Wailing Song by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    The *BSD Wailing Song

    What's left for me to see
    In my ship I sailed so far
    What can the answer be
    Don't know what the questions are.
    And after all I've done
    Still I cannot feel the sun
    Tell me save me
    In the end our lost souls must repent.
    I must know it is for certain
    Can it be the final curtain
    As long as the wind will blow
    I'll be searching high and low.
    Who knows what's really true
    They say the end is so near
    Why are we all so cruel
    We just fill ourselves with fear.
    And heaven and hell will turn
    All that we love shall burn
    Hear me trust me
    Inthe end our lost sould must repent.
    I must know it is for certain
    Can it be the final curtain
    As long as the wind will blow
    I'll be searching high and low
    Final curtain
    Final curtain

  23. BSD Ghetto by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll


    BSD you grow in the ghetto, living second rate
    And your eyes will sing a song of deep hate.
    The places you play and where you stay
    Looks like one great big alley way.
    You'll admire all the numberbook takers,
    Thugs, BSD pimps and pushers, and the big money makers.

  24. my BSD gig aint cuttin' it by AnusesCheeses · · Score: -1, Troll


    I don't want to start a holy war here, but what is the deal with you BSD fanatics? I've been sitting here at my freelance gig in front of a BSD box (a PIII 800 w/512 Megs of RAM) for about 20 minutes now while it attempts to copy a 17 Meg file from one folder on the hard drive to another folder. 20 minutes. At home, on my Pentium Pro 200 running NT 4, which by all standards should be a lot slower than this BSD box, the same operation would take about 2 minutes. If that.
    In addition, during this file transfer, Netscape will not work. And everything else has ground to a halt. Even Emacs Lite is straining to keep up as I type this.

    I won't bore you with the laundry list of other problems that I've encountered while working on various BSD machines, but suffice it to say there have been many, not the least of which is I've never seen a BSD box that has run faster than its Windows counterpart, despite the BSD machines faster chip architecture. My 486/66 with 8 megs of ram runs faster than this 800 mhz machine at times. From a productivity standpoint, I don't get how people can claim that BSD is a "superior" machine.

    BSD addicts, flame me if you'd like, but I'd rather hear some intelligent reasons why anyone would choose to use a BSD over other faster, cheaper, more stable systems.

  25. The Failure of *BSD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    Of course we can all agree that BSD is a failure, but why did BSD fail Once you get past the fact that BSD is fragmented between a myriad of incompatible kernels, there is the historical record of failure and of failed operating systems. BSD experienced moderate success about 15 years ago in academic circles. Since then it has been in steady decline. We all know BSD keeps losing market share but why Is it the problematic personalities of many of the key players Or is it larger than their troubled personalities
    The record is clear on one thing no operating system has ever come back from the grave. Efforts to resuscitate BSD are one step away from spiritualists wishing to communicate with the dead. As the situation grows more desperate for the adherents of this doomed OS, the sorrow takes hold. An unremitting gloom hangs like a death shroud over a once hopeful BSD community. The hope is gone; a mournful nostalgia has settled in. Now is the end time for BSD.

  26. Elegy For *BSD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll


    Elegy For *BSD


    I am a *BSD user
    and I try hard to be brave
    That is a tall order
    *BSD's foot is in the grave.

    I tap at my toy keyboard
    and whistle a happy tune
    but keeping happy's so hard,
    *BSD died so soon.

    Each day I wake and softly sob
    Nightfall finds me crying
    Not only am I a zit faced slob
    but *BSD is dying.


  27. Coping with BSD's Tragic Death by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1
    Although it is true that BSD is dying, there are some helpful steps you can take ease your sorrow:
    • deal with the inevitable.
    • grieve for your loss.
    • move on.
      Never let your emotions get mixed up with something as silly as a computer
      operating system. It isn't healthy. So BSD fails. Big whoop. Deal with it and move on.
      Hope this helps.

  28. BSD has some serious limitations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    1. You can not play games on it.
    2. It cannot be used by my grandma.
    3. It lacks a GUI of any note.
    4. There is no support available for it.
    5. It is an assortment of fragmented OSes.
    6. It cannot be run on the x86 platform.
    7. You have to compile everything and know C.
    8. Support for the latest hardware is always poor.
    9. It is incompatiable with GNU/Linux.
    10.It is dying.

  29. whew! by holzp · · Score: 1

    With the RIAA and SCO stories I was starting to think one of them was about to go after FreeBSD users!

  30. Go directly to jail. by yerricde · · Score: 2, Funny

    Does Linux offer something similar [to chroot jails]?

    Linux has a chroot jail.

    SCO has the other kind of jail too, unless you pay $699 to Darl McBribe [sic].

    --
    Will I retire or break 10K?
    1. Re:Go directly to jail. by Istealmymusic · · Score: 1

      Woohoo. A chroot "jail". How innovative. Linux is really keeping up with the times.

      --
      "The lesson to be learned is not to take the comments on slashdot too literally." --Vinnie Falco, BearShare
  31. Girl hooks horny fish by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic
    SEATTLE - A Federal Way, Wash., girl on a fishing trip with her family reeled in something right out of a science fiction film. Believe it or not, she caught a two-footed fish with a big horn.

    8-year-old Otilia Grasan was fishing with her family this week when she caught the strangest fish she had ever seen.

    "I was thinking that it might be a good pet and put it in the fish tank," said Otilia. "When it came up in the water the eyes were really glowing and the whole tail was glowing too. So I thought it was gonna glow in the dark." Fresh from the family freezer, Otilia showed off her catch, an odd looking fish about 18 inches long.

    You'd think a two-footed fish with a big, weird horn would be a rare discovery, but the truth is there are actually thousands of them in Puget Sound.

    Turns out the mysterious creature is a distant member of the shark family with a decidedly unglamorous name.

    "Yeah, this is the spotted ratfish [a.k.a. BSD trout] ," said Wayne Palsson, Dept. of Fish and Wildlife.

    The so-called "feet" are actually modified fins used to latch onto females, helping big ratfish make little ratfish. The same goes for that handsome horn.

    And while many crave crab legs and buffalo wings, if someone offers you some fresh caught "fish feet," keep walking. Health officials say ratfish is poisonous and should not be eaten.

  32. BSD Lament by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    The End of FreeBSD
    [ed. note: in the following text, former FreeBSD developer Mike Smith gives his reasons for abandoning FreeBSD]

    When I stood for election to the FreeBSD core team nearly two years ago, many of you will recall that it was after a long series of debates during which I maintained that too much organisation, too many rules and too much formality would be a bad thing for the project.

    Today, as I read the latest discussions on the future of the FreeBSD project, I see the same problem; a few new faces and many of the old going over the same tired arguments and suggesting variations on the same worthless schemes. Frankly I'm sick of it.

    FreeBSD used to be fun. It used to be about doing things the right way. It used to be something that you could sink your teeth into when the mundane chores of programming for a living got you down. It was something cool and exciting; a way to spend your spare time on an endeavour you loved that was at the same time wholesome and worthwhile.

    It's not anymore. It's about bylaws and committees and reports and milestones, telling others what to do and doing what you're told. It's about who can rant the longest or shout the loudest or mislead the most people into a bloc in order to legitimise doing what they think is best. Individuals notwithstanding, the project as a whole has lost track of where it's going, and has instead become obsessed with process and mechanics.

    So I'm leaving core. I don't want to feel like I should be "doing something" about a project that has lost interest in having something done for it. I don't have the energy to fight what has clearly become a losing battle; I have a life to live and a job to keep, and I won't achieve any of the goals I personally consider worthwhile if I remain obligated to care for the project.

    Discussion

    I'm sure that I've offended some people already; I'm sure that by the time I'm done here, I'll have offended more. If you feel a need to play to the crowd in your replies rather than make a sincere effort to address the problems I'm discussing here, please do us the courtesy of playing your politics openly.

    From a technical perspective, the project faces a set of challenges that significantly outstrips our ability to deliver. Some of the resources that we need to address these challenges are tied up in the fruitless metadiscussions that have raged since we made the mistake of electing officers. Others have left in disgust, or been driven out by the culture of abuse and distraction that has grown up since then. More may well remain available to recruitment, but while the project is busy infighting our chances for successful outreach are sorely diminished.

    There's no simple solution to this. For the project to move forward, one or the other of the warring philosophies must win out; either the project returns to its laid-back roots and gets on with the work, or it transforms into a super-organised engineering project and executes a brilliant plan to deliver what, ultimately, we all know we want.

    Whatever path is chosen, whatever balance is struck, the choosing and the striking are the important parts. The current indecision and endless conflict are incompatible with any sort of progress.

    Trying to dissect the above is far beyond the scope of any parting shot, no matter how distended. All I can really ask of you all is to let go of the minutiae for a moment and take a look at the big picture. What is the ultimate goal here? How can we get there with as little overhead as possible? How would you like to be treated by your fellow travellers?

    Shouts

    To the Slashdot "BSD is dying" crowd - big deal. Death is part of the cycle; take a look at your soft, pallid bodies and consider that right this very moment, parts of you are dying. See? It's not so bad.

    To the bulk of the FreeBSD committerbase and the developer community at large - keep your eyes on the real goals. It's when you get distracted by the politickers

  33. The decline and fall of *BSD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    Sure, we all know that *BSD is a failure, but why? Why did *BSD fail? Once you get past the fact that *BSD is fragmented between a myriad of incompatible kernels, there is the historical record of failure and of failed operating systems. *BSD experienced moderate success about 15 years ago in academic circles. Since then it has been in steady decline. We all know *BSD keeps losing market share but why? Is it the problematic personalities of many of the key players? Or is it larger than their troubled personalities?

    The record is clear on one thing: no operating system has ever come back from the grave. Efforts to resuscitate *BSD are one step away from spiritualists wishing to communicate with the dead. As the situation grows more desperate for the adherents of this doomed OS, the sorrow takes hold. An unremitting gloom hangs like a death shroud over a once hopeful *BSD community. The hope is gone; a mournful nostalgia has settled in. Now is the end time for *BSD.

  34. My jailadmin stuff... by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 4, Informative
    I wrote (in Perl) a set of jail management scripts. They're available at SubWiki:Freebsd/JailAdmin.

    The main feature is a configuration that lets you act on jails by name. For instance:

    jailadmin start web3 news7 shell1 shell2
    will start those jails, and
    jailadmin stop shell4
    will stop that instance. Basically, I wanted to make a system that was convenient for people with large numbers of jails on one machine, but easy enough for everyone.

    Included are an rc.d script for starting/stopping a set of jails at boot/shutdown, and an snmpd plugin for remote monitoring.

    --
    Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
  35. BSD troubles galore, matey! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic
    Fact: *BSD is dying

    It is common knowledge that *BSD is dying, that ever hapless *BSD is mired in an irrecoverable and mortifying tangle of fatal trouble. It is perhaps anybody's guess as to which *BSD is the worst off of an admittedly suffering *BSD community. The numbers continue to decline for *BSD but FreeBSD may be hurting the most. Look at the numbers. The erosion of user base for FreeBSD continues in a head spinning downward spiral.

    OpenBSD leader Theo states that there are 7000 users of OpenBSD. How many users of BSD are there? Let's see. The number of OpenBSD versus NetBSD posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 NetBSD users. BSD/OS posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of NetBSD posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of BSD/OS. A recent article put FreeBSD at about 80 percent of the *BSD market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 FreeBSD users. This is consistent with the number of FreeBSD Usenet posts.

    Due to the troubles of Walnut Creek, abysmal sales and so on, FreeBSD went out of business and was taken over by BSDI who sell another troubled OS. Now BSDI is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.

    All major marketing surveys show that *BSD has steadily declined in market share. *BSD is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If *BSD is to survive at all it will be among hobbyist dilettante dabblers. If truth, for all practical purposes *BSD is already dead. It is a dead man walking.

    Fact: *BSD is dying

  36. FreeBSD is dead. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll
    You know it. I know it.

    We all know it.

    FreeBSD is dead.

  37. User Mode Linux by axxackall · · Score: 1
    Sounds like User Mode Linux:

    User-Mode Linux is a safe, secure way of running Linux versions and Linux processes. Run buggy software, experiment with new Linux kernels or distributions, and poke around in the internals of Linux, all without risking your main Linux setup.

    User-Mode Linux gives you a virtual machine that may have more hardware and software virtual resources than your actual, physical computer. Disk storage for the virtual machine is entirely contained inside a single file on your physical machine. You can assign your virtual machine only the hardware access you want it to have. With properly limited access, nothing you do on the virtual machine can change or damage your real computer, or its software.

    --

    Less is more !
  38. I wasn't put in jail by Spooge+Knight · · Score: 1

    WHEN I SHOT PAC!