Slashdot Mirror
A "Never Reboot" Service For Linux
An anonymous reader writes "Ksplice, the company based on the MIT Ksplice project, is now offering its 'never reboot' service for Red Hat, Debian, and other Linux distros. You subscribe and get real-time kernel security updates that apply in-memory instead of rebooting. Last summer we discussed the free service for Ubuntu. Cool tech, but will people really pay $4 a month for this?"
Its a shame that MS never figured out how to actually implement this. How many times do I have to restart my computer to finish applying update?
I reject your reality
The patent on this was filed in 2002. Yet in 2010 I am still making a handsome profit in overtime rebooting customer systems on a "patch Tuesday" monthly frenzy.
Please MS, don't implement this one.
Color me stupid but wouldn't any application in which you'd rather not be rebooting (i.e. Router, firewall, file server, etc...) be the exact same application in which you'd NEVER want some 3rd party having access to your kernel? I mean, if a large percent of distros were using this I can just imagine it would be the A#1 target for every malicious coder in the world.
Designing your own operating system isn't exactly a small feat.. Linux already has very good penetration into the server market, and offers the security that most organizations should have. Linux is what Windows should be. There's a LOT you can do with that kernel.
Obviously complexity makes security difficult, but there's nothing wrong with making something complex if you're actually capable of managing it. Is setting up a rock solid firewall difficult for the average person in IT? Should we just get rid of anything in security that is relatively complex? I'd much rather have more options (not necessarily obfuscation) than be pigeon holed into something just because it's simple. Security is not simple, and it never will be.
Yeah, I love the updates that require a reboot so they can install another update that then requires another reboot.
The occasional reboot, under controlled circumstances, is an excellent test of what will happen in an emergency situation. Mainly, it answers the question of whether the server and required services actually will all come back up by themselves.
More importantly, if your service architecture can't handle the scheduled outage of individual servers, then it is unquestionably broken.
If you are concerned with individual server uptimes having a bearing on anything except your e-penis, then You're Doing It Wrong.