OpenBSD seems to have bottomless routing performance in my installations. Any variant thereof should do the trick. OpenBSD is fairly user friendly to setup in these configrations compared to other systems like FreeBSD and Linux.
There are too many assumptions: the implementation is flawless, that the input is indeed on the console and not from hijacked controls or remote desktop, that the user hasn't been engineered into adding a bad repo key. This is just poor.
Is there any evidence that non-modded consoles have been banned? MS is fully right not to publish their methods lest the modders develop an immediate workaround.
AAA games are going to be non-free for a long time, unlike most other genres of software which don't require millions of dollars to create assets for.
I realize that indulging in games requires losing some freedom. I bought a console to play games on to keep that shit away from my PC, which works fine for everything else. This doesn't bother me too much because games are a luxury and I did fine without them in the 70s, whereas my PC is essential to operating in the modern world.
One advantage of the consoles' strict policies is it also keeps the cheaters and jerks to a minimum.
Reading the disassembly and critique of Commodore BASIC by gurus like Jim Butterfield and Rae West reveals Gates to be quite a hacker. A hacker's hacker if you will.
OpenBSD should boot and run on that. I can't remember if they're still shipping XFree86 along with X.org but it wasn't so long ago they were. Don't expect to do anything useful with it in X, unless you're willing to run an old version of Netscape or something. Maybe Dillo will run.
Copper is finished. Who will maintain copper and TV coax when everyone has fibre? But as you've shown, fibre is too expensive to be run by a commercial entity hoping to make profit. This was also the case for copper, remember Telecom was a government body.
Like the copper network before it, this will require the resources and investment only the government can provide. Do you complain about the government building other infrastructure like roads? Australia needs this.
They could just take the OpenBSD approach and produce installation media with instruction booklet to sell. I buy it to support the project even though I rarely use it to install.
You can bypass RBAC on Solaris. Covert root to a role as per doco, then as a user not associated with root role run sudo. Assuming the user has root role in sudo, that user becomes root.
Solaris supported Ultrasparc NX in the late 90s. OpenBSD's innovation was to enforce NX pages on i386 which doesn't have any such hardware support. OpenBSD supports hardware NX of course.
Re:OpenBSD - not that secure...
on
OpenBSD 4.6 Released
·
· Score: 3, Informative
OpenBSD's focus is preventing the exploits in the first place with many overflow vulnerabities in third-party software being non-exploitable on OpenBSD. After running it for 10 years, I trust OpenBSD's record. It has some of the best in the business probing it, and with the most serious flaw in years being a subtle IP6 attack, I think that trust is well founded. If you were to prove otherwise, I'm sure you would instantly be a big name in security.
Although sound design, role security is added complexity which increases scope for vulnerabilities. From coding errors to implementation errors, complexity breeds insecurity. They also create a false sense of security: having implemented RBAC on Solaris I was initially impressed until I realized one could bypass it with suid bombs.
OpenBSD's simple design and sound default permissions mean that even with a local account, it is very difficult to gain root access. The base system is comprehensive so usually there's little reason to go to ports to implement OpenBSD in its perimiter focused role.
You would do well to back up your claim that OpenBSD is snake-oil.
There's nothing unusual about wiping a guest account, just that this particular implementation sucks. OSX has always had DMG images, why not leverage that? Why not use a quota ramdisk? Why not wipe it on logoff instead of login?
Any of these would alleviate the bug discussed here and make a lot more sense doing it.
We're all well aware of Saddam's chemical weapons, the US sold them to him after all. But that's not what the parent was asking, which was about the evidence of nuclear and biological weapons programs.
explain exactly how one can manage a network full of Windows workstations with the level of control AD policies offer using nothing but F/OSS software
The intricacies and problems of managing a Windows desktop LAN are decidedly Windows' own eccentricities; they just don't exist when using other platforms. So please don't point this out as a problem with free software when it's the commitment to expensive and unwieldly non-free software that's the issue.
Backwards compatibility is a non-free software issue. If you have source, you can make it work on your upgraded platform or migrate to an entirely new architecture.
I suppose a couple of bucks a month is a bit rich for some people, but it's flat for all games. The cost is more than offset by the discounts gold subscribers get on XBLA specials, of which I'm a big fan, and the quality of the service far eclipses anything I've have on PC.
Last I heard, MS has over 20 million current subscribers. With that sort of income they'd be stupid not to charge what the market can bear.
Slashdot Mirror
I'll agree, sysadmin is as much about process and discipline as it is tech knowhow.
I smoked for nearly 25 years and stopped a week after taking up snus. Haven't smoked since.
Stop watching TV.
OpenBSD seems to have bottomless routing performance in my installations. Any variant thereof should do the trick. OpenBSD is fairly user friendly to setup in these configrations compared to other systems like FreeBSD and Linux.
There are too many assumptions: the implementation is flawless, that the input is indeed on the console and not from hijacked controls or remote desktop, that the user hasn't been engineered into adding a bad repo key. This is just poor.
Is there any evidence that non-modded consoles have been banned? MS is fully right not to publish their methods lest the modders develop an immediate workaround.
AAA games are going to be non-free for a long time, unlike most other genres of software which don't require millions of dollars to create assets for.
I realize that indulging in games requires losing some freedom. I bought a console to play games on to keep that shit away from my PC, which works fine for everything else. This doesn't bother me too much because games are a luxury and I did fine without them in the 70s, whereas my PC is essential to operating in the modern world.
One advantage of the consoles' strict policies is it also keeps the cheaters and jerks to a minimum.
Reading the disassembly and critique of Commodore BASIC by gurus like Jim Butterfield and Rae West reveals Gates to be quite a hacker. A hacker's hacker if you will.
OpenBSD should boot and run on that. I can't remember if they're still shipping XFree86 along with X.org but it wasn't so long ago they were. Don't expect to do anything useful with it in X, unless you're willing to run an old version of Netscape or something. Maybe Dillo will run.
Copper is finished. Who will maintain copper and TV coax when everyone has fibre? But as you've shown, fibre is too expensive to be run by a commercial entity hoping to make profit. This was also the case for copper, remember Telecom was a government body.
Like the copper network before it, this will require the resources and investment only the government can provide. Do you complain about the government building other infrastructure like roads? Australia needs this.
They could just take the OpenBSD approach and produce installation media with instruction booklet to sell. I buy it to support the project even though I rarely use it to install.
I think you should test my observation before poo-pooing my incompetence.
You can bypass RBAC on Solaris. Covert root to a role as per doco, then as a user not associated with root role run sudo. Assuming the user has root role in sudo, that user becomes root.
Solaris supported Ultrasparc NX in the late 90s. OpenBSD's innovation was to enforce NX pages on i386 which doesn't have any such hardware support. OpenBSD supports hardware NX of course.
OpenBSD's focus is preventing the exploits in the first place with many overflow vulnerabities in third-party software being non-exploitable on OpenBSD. After running it for 10 years, I trust OpenBSD's record. It has some of the best in the business probing it, and with the most serious flaw in years being a subtle IP6 attack, I think that trust is well founded. If you were to prove otherwise, I'm sure you would instantly be a big name in security.
Although sound design, role security is added complexity which increases scope for vulnerabilities. From coding errors to implementation errors, complexity breeds insecurity. They also create a false sense of security: having implemented RBAC on Solaris I was initially impressed until I realized one could bypass it with suid bombs.
OpenBSD's simple design and sound default permissions mean that even with a local account, it is very difficult to gain root access. The base system is comprehensive so usually there's little reason to go to ports to implement OpenBSD in its perimiter focused role.
You would do well to back up your claim that OpenBSD is snake-oil.
I still use my Palm M105 for ebooks and plucks, but this thing looks a bit more readable. I'll be for getting one.
There's nothing unusual about wiping a guest account, just that this particular implementation sucks. OSX has always had DMG images, why not leverage that? Why not use a quota ramdisk? Why not wipe it on logoff instead of login?
Any of these would alleviate the bug discussed here and make a lot more sense doing it.
Right, I can see how that would go. It's not a great idea in the first place though, so the GP is right.
We're all well aware of Saddam's chemical weapons, the US sold them to him after all. But that's not what the parent was asking, which was about the evidence of nuclear and biological weapons programs.
explain exactly how one can manage a network full of Windows workstations with the level of control AD policies offer using nothing but F/OSS software
The intricacies and problems of managing a Windows desktop LAN are decidedly Windows' own eccentricities; they just don't exist when using other platforms. So please don't point this out as a problem with free software when it's the commitment to expensive and unwieldly non-free software that's the issue.
While good, Half Life 2 was considered to be too short and the episodes even shorter and caused some ill will towards being shafted for the price
I don't recall ever hearing that complaint, but my reaction is there's no satisfying some people.
For the rest as well.
Backwards compatibility is a non-free software issue. If you have source, you can make it work on your upgraded platform or migrate to an entirely new architecture.
In other news: US Bank CTO enjoys marvellous weekend in the Bahamas at the IBM conference.
I suppose a couple of bucks a month is a bit rich for some people, but it's flat for all games. The cost is more than offset by the discounts gold subscribers get on XBLA specials, of which I'm a big fan, and the quality of the service far eclipses anything I've have on PC.
Last I heard, MS has over 20 million current subscribers. With that sort of income they'd be stupid not to charge what the market can bear.