While tar will work with smaller transfers it's simply not practical to transfer 100GB+.
AFAIK you can't get rsync to su - before starting the transfer.
You still haven't presented a convincing argument against allowing direct root login when the password is sufficiently strong or changing SSH to a arbitrary port.
I've always found this to be a silly superstition probably dating back from the days of telnet or rsh.
cPanel's DNS only feature requires direct root login (although using keys).
I'm sorry but I've seen so many laughably stupid attempts at ssh "security" that I have to address the following flaws.
PermitRootLogin no:
Preventing root login is impractical for transferring files outside of your own user account.
Preventing root login is impractical for use with most control panels.
The only argument I can think of for not permitting root login is that they don't have to guess the user name. On some systems I will set PermitRootLogin without-password to still permit key based authentication which is what I use primarily anyway.
PasswordAuthentication no
Using this in a shared hosting environment is simply not practical as most customers can barely figure out how to download PuTTY. I don't really like the idea of giving shell access to these customers at all but that is another topic.
All changing the SSH port will do is annoy and confuse users. Some bots may not do a port-scan yet but if significant number of people start using arbitrary port scans they will simply start scanning.
Real suggestions:
Update your software
Require strong passwords and audit the system regularly.
Use secure protocols. (ftp+tls, imaps, pops)
Use a firewall that dynamically blocks multiple failed connection attempts.
The community college I went to had a projector in every class room. We used to steal a room that had no classes and watch movies.
The local university also has a projector and shuttle pc in each podium for the lecture labs.
I can just imagine Joe idiot taking down half the grid because he decided it was a good idea to screw with the generator and cause failures.
Remote administration gives me the chills.
I'd agree.
I've worked at two places one with almost complete idiots and two or three passable technicians if they were demoted two levels who were jerks. Management was cared only about numbers and we were constantly micromanaged by several different 'supervisors'. The quality of support we delivered was horrible.
I ended up moving to a competing shop. Management here more or less ignores us unless something needs to be done and usually we are selected based on whoever volunteers first. Technicians nice and passable if they were demoted two levels. Quality of support is passable but still below my expectations. The end result is that I enjoy working a lot more although the incompetence of my peers drives me nuts.
I think slashdot is missing the fact that who the laptop belongs to is ALMOST irrelevant since the OP still needs to talk to a lawyer about the IP issues.
Using a company laptop for work and a personal laptop for personal stuff may help your case that you own the IP in question but it won't be the defining line.
If your too cheap for a lawyer the simplest but not entirely bulletproof is to draw up an agreement that specifically states the assignment of the IP rights.
NO it wouldn't be in conflict. It can be but that doesn't make it a constant problem. The only time it would be in conflict is when it is replacing the scientific method when the scientific method was claimed to of been deployed. Both faith and the scientific method have places in society but neither is a full time requirement.
I still find it difficult to understand that someone could be so analytical in one part of their life and entertain irrational dogma in another.
The disregards are small and limited in regards to science and the base of knowledge around it. It's also small in the amounts of people in religion who do it. Science actually started in religious universities. They are not incompatible.
Galileo's work in astronomy considered heresy and so all his works from that point on were banned. There may have only been two or three people involved in the actual decision making but would you believe that anyone with these beliefs would make their own decision after the Pope declared them heresy?
I'd think this tainted a large population perception on the basic mechanics of our universe for generations. Not something I'd call small.
And I;m merely stating that your concerns are unfounded and shooting or ignoring the messenger instead of the message is not a valid point of debate. You are being blinded by your extreme views which is allowing your ignorance to triumph. You can be skeptical of the claims but there is nothing to suggest the source is biased and lying or anything. IF the facts don't pan out, then you will have a valid concern over the content instead of bashing it for the messenger.
It happens all the time. Your lack of knowledge or ignorance is proving your own bias. About 40% [findarticles.com] of scientist do believe in god and Only 52 percent of scientists [physorg.com] identified themselves as having no current religious affiliation. That is something completely counter to your opinion.
Perhaps my perception of religious is tainted by my own experiences and I never tried to imply that I was unbiased. I don't think that makes my skepticism misplaced.
I wouldn't trust an atheist to give me a unbiased opinion on religion.
Science is a belief for some. Take a look at the people claiming biological evolution theory as a whole is fact. Obviously this violates the scientific method in several places because it doesn't allow us to increase our knowledge or the possibility of falsification. It's even more problematic considering that when you separate evolution into adaptation and speciation, we have no no empirical evidence of it's existence without mucking with the definition of species in order to show it. Now it's likely that it's close enough to one day be proven right, but as of now, these people claiming it is fact instead of probable or likely are employing the very same belief system and mental processing as with the any religion and faith.
To take anything as an absolute truth is fairly foolish. I'd likely categorize people such as this slightly less annoying than religious people. I'm not familiar enough with evolution theory to give a proper argument but I was under the impression that speciation has been observed:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-speciation.html
To be honest I don't really care about the origins of life as I don't expect the question to be settled in my lifetime or that would have a marked impact on how I live my life.
I also do not agree with codifying religion into laws. But I have no disagreement with someone taking time off to attend church or a business coming to it's own conclusion to shut down on S
I read the first paragraph of the wikipedia article which gives me the impression that it's still requires faith which I'd would be in direct conflict with the scientific method.
Religion is notorious for disregarding scientific fact and crushing all opposition. From my point of view it has a very bad track record.
I merely was stating that the 'Christian Science Monitor' makes me disinclined to believe that the article has anything to with with/real/ science.
I have no doubt that it is possible for someone with religious belief to appropriately use the scientific method. I just don't think it's very likely.
Science isn't a belief as much as it is analytical method for approaching a problem. I really don't care what any other people want to believe as long as they keep their nonsense out of my life. I'm particularly annoyed with a city bylaw regulating business hours on Sundays.
In any case it's a horrible title and I'd think it was deliberately chosen to give the wrong impression.
I see nothing in the article that I couldn't have guessed from the name.
I wouldn't trust a blind man to tell me what something looks like. I wouldn't trust a deaf man to tell me what something sounds like.
I certainly wouldn't trust a report from a organization with followers that willfully distort their perception of reality to fit within their teachings.
In my personal experience religious people tend to like to stay within their own little groups. It might just be that they happen to know enough people within their group to never have to venture out of the group to find someone with the skills they need.
I wouldn't be at all surprised if the 'scientists' involved shared the same belief system.
Sorry, but I have a hard time believing anything that is the result of/research/ from something titled "Christian Science".
Christian Science is a religious belief system founded by Mary Baker Eddy in 1866 and is practiced by members of the Church of Christ, Scientist. Christian Science asserts that humanity and the universe as a whole are spiritual rather than material in nature and that truth and good are real tangible things, therefore, evil and error are unreal. Christian Scientists believe that only through prayer and fully knowing and understanding God will this be demonstrated.
In other news.... Christian Scientists discover that atheists a 66.6% more responsible for global warming than Christians. This was meticulously researched by Pastor Mark Mathewson during several hours of prayer and days of fasting.
I meant to say that they should not need to be accessed/regularly/ over the network so a friendly name is really not justified. If absolutely required we can always create a friendly alias pointing to the asset tag. Although if I were considering that I'd also be considering moving whatever service or resource to real server.
For example we have AT101245. This machine has an A record pointing to it's DHCP assigned address like AT101245.int.example.org.
Yes, RAID1 can be used to mirror drives but this is not the normal use case and certainly not something I'd someone that had to ask slashdot when there are thousands of quality articles written about such topics.
Slashdot Mirror
MySpace should not honor the second request.
They do try.
Mostly I get a few laughs.
Assuming the Artist here is telling the truth (or believes he is this is not a problem.
Umm, I handle the abuse desk at a large hosting company and this is how it should have gone:
1. WB sends DMCA complaint
2. MySpace takes down content
3. Artist goes WTF and sends in a DMCA counter notice
4. MySpace restores the content.
(Not MySpace's problem anymore) ...
X. WB takes Artist to court
You still haven't presented a convincing argument that permitting root to login is inherently insecure.
I have several linux boxes that permit root login via keys and password. In six years none have been compromised.
Nobody but me has access to root on these systems and it wills stay that way because I use and remember proper passwords.
While tar will work with smaller transfers it's simply not practical to transfer 100GB+.
AFAIK you can't get rsync to su - before starting the transfer.
You still haven't presented a convincing argument against allowing direct root login when the password is sufficiently strong or changing SSH to a arbitrary port.
I've always found this to be a silly superstition probably dating back from the days of telnet or rsh.
cPanel's DNS only feature requires direct root login (although using keys).
I'm sorry but I've seen so many laughably stupid attempts at ssh "security" that I have to address the following flaws. PermitRootLogin no: Preventing root login is impractical for transferring files outside of your own user account. Preventing root login is impractical for use with most control panels. The only argument I can think of for not permitting root login is that they don't have to guess the user name. On some systems I will set PermitRootLogin without-password to still permit key based authentication which is what I use primarily anyway. PasswordAuthentication no Using this in a shared hosting environment is simply not practical as most customers can barely figure out how to download PuTTY. I don't really like the idea of giving shell access to these customers at all but that is another topic. All changing the SSH port will do is annoy and confuse users. Some bots may not do a port-scan yet but if significant number of people start using arbitrary port scans they will simply start scanning. Real suggestions: Update your software Require strong passwords and audit the system regularly. Use secure protocols. (ftp+tls, imaps, pops) Use a firewall that dynamically blocks multiple failed connection attempts.
I believe the default gentoo configuration file does. There is nothing wrong with allowing root to login.
The community college I went to had a projector in every class room. We used to steal a room that had no classes and watch movies. The local university also has a projector and shuttle pc in each podium for the lecture labs.
I can just imagine Joe idiot taking down half the grid because he decided it was a good idea to screw with the generator and cause failures. Remote administration gives me the chills.
I'd agree. I've worked at two places one with almost complete idiots and two or three passable technicians if they were demoted two levels who were jerks. Management was cared only about numbers and we were constantly micromanaged by several different 'supervisors'. The quality of support we delivered was horrible. I ended up moving to a competing shop. Management here more or less ignores us unless something needs to be done and usually we are selected based on whoever volunteers first. Technicians nice and passable if they were demoted two levels. Quality of support is passable but still below my expectations. The end result is that I enjoy working a lot more although the incompetence of my peers drives me nuts.
This is what the girl at work said to HIS girlfriend.
I think slashdot is missing the fact that who the laptop belongs to is ALMOST irrelevant since the OP still needs to talk to a lawyer about the IP issues.
Using a company laptop for work and a personal laptop for personal stuff may help your case that you own the IP in question but it won't be the defining line.
If your too cheap for a lawyer the simplest but not entirely bulletproof is to draw up an agreement that specifically states the assignment of the IP rights.
CAVEAT EMPTOR: IANAL. No refunds.
I still find it difficult to understand that someone could be so analytical in one part of their life and entertain irrational dogma in another.
Galileo's work in astronomy considered heresy and so all his works from that point on were banned. There may have only been two or three people involved in the actual decision making but would you believe that anyone with these beliefs would make their own decision after the Pope declared them heresy?
I'd think this tainted a large population perception on the basic mechanics of our universe for generations. Not something I'd call small.
Perhaps my perception of religious is tainted by my own experiences and I never tried to imply that I was unbiased. I don't think that makes my skepticism misplaced. I wouldn't trust an atheist to give me a unbiased opinion on religion.
To take anything as an absolute truth is fairly foolish. I'd likely categorize people such as this slightly less annoying than religious people. I'm not familiar enough with evolution theory to give a proper argument but I was under the impression that speciation has been observed: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-speciation.html To be honest I don't really care about the origins of life as I don't expect the question to be settled in my lifetime or that would have a marked impact on how I live my life.
I read the first paragraph of the wikipedia article which gives me the impression that it's still requires faith which I'd would be in direct conflict with the scientific method.
Religion is notorious for disregarding scientific fact and crushing all opposition. From my point of view it has a very bad track record.
I merely was stating that the 'Christian Science Monitor' makes me disinclined to believe that the article has anything to with with /real/ science.
I have no doubt that it is possible for someone with religious belief to appropriately use the scientific method. I just don't think it's very likely.
Science isn't a belief as much as it is analytical method for approaching a problem. I really don't care what any other people want to believe as long as they keep their nonsense out of my life. I'm particularly annoyed with a city bylaw regulating business hours on Sundays.
In any case it's a horrible title and I'd think it was deliberately chosen to give the wrong impression.
I see nothing in the article that I couldn't have guessed from the name.
I wouldn't trust a blind man to tell me what something looks like. I wouldn't trust a deaf man to tell me what something sounds like.
I certainly wouldn't trust a report from a organization with followers that willfully distort their perception of reality to fit within their teachings.
In my personal experience religious people tend to like to stay within their own little groups. It might just be that they happen to know enough people within their group to never have to venture out of the group to find someone with the skills they need.
I wouldn't be at all surprised if the 'scientists' involved shared the same belief system.
Sorry, but I have a hard time believing anything that is the result of /research/ from something titled "Christian Science".
Christian Science is a religious belief system founded by Mary Baker Eddy in 1866 and is practiced by members of the Church of Christ, Scientist. Christian Science asserts that humanity and the universe as a whole are spiritual rather than material in nature and that truth and good are real tangible things, therefore, evil and error are unreal. Christian Scientists believe that only through prayer and fully knowing and understanding God will this be demonstrated.
Borrowed from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_Science
In other news.... Christian Scientists discover that atheists a 66.6% more responsible for global warming than Christians. This was meticulously researched by Pastor Mark Mathewson during several hours of prayer and days of fasting.
I love the searching anywhere in the URL and use it frequently.
I was wondering when/if someone mentioned this.
I'm sure this feature as been around for a good while.
You can set it to History (previous behavior), History and Bookmarks, or nothing.
Integration with your asset management system could make these changes automatic.
I still think changing one CNAME record is a lot more trivial than changing the machine especially if your in a active directory/windows environment.
Hi,
I meant to say that they should not need to be accessed /regularly/ over the network so a friendly name is really not justified. If absolutely required we can always create a friendly alias pointing to the asset tag. Although if I were considering that I'd also be considering moving whatever service or resource to real server.
For example we have AT101245. This machine has an A record pointing to it's DHCP assigned address like AT101245.int.example.org.
The appropriate PTR record is also assigned.
If your users are so lazy that they can't read the asset tag off the front of a machine you got bigger problems on your hand.
Remote desktoping AT102024.int.example.org is not significantly more difficult than moniker.int.example.org.
Most of the time I find this easier than trying to spell their names over the phone.
I've found that if it isn't automatic it gets forgotten.
Three years later you'll have WRKSTN_ROOM423 in room 132 and the admin or user that moved it will have either forgot completely or moved on.
Workstations should not need to be accessed over the network so they should not need a friendly name.
There is no reason why the tag number which is clearly printed on the machine should not be used.
It's actually not that hard.
If you want portability across *nix variations use OSS as ALSA has an emulation layer. If you only need Linux support use ALSA.
Hi,
Yes, RAID1 can be used to mirror drives but this is not the normal use case and certainly not something I'd someone that had to ask slashdot when there are thousands of quality articles written about such topics.