What part of "running X" makes you think they must be identically configured or even the same OS? They all must be running X (nothing else, not Gnome, not KDE, no windowmanager necessary) and have same color depth, but that is it. It makes use of the X protocol's native network functionality so in theory (this hasn't been tested well past Linux and apparently SGI's IRIX) any X Server should do. Did you even look at the example where I had two monitors one with a small display that was a part of the larger display?
As to what DMX buys you, do you know what xinerama is? This is not just the mouse cursor moving from machine to machine. You can drag windows between displays. I can start with an XTerm on the left most machine and drag it all the way over to the right most machine. Or leave it split between the two machines (this is really funky, especially if they are of different resolutions). You can maximise a window across all of the machines. This can have issues if they are not all running at the same resolution, but you can still do it, there will just be some portions you can't see on the smaller monitor. Imagine nine 15" LCDs running at 1024x768 with their frames taken off sitting in a square. With DMX (and nine machines, one fast and eight slow, or fewer if you use a multi-head card or multiple cards in one or more machines) you can have a 60" monitor with a resolution of 9216x6912. Maximise mplayer playing a DVD and presto you have a big screen tv with massive resolution (admittably a very expensive one).
If I read x2vnc's page correctly it is for people who want to use X Windows and MS Windows together in a multi-headed environment (one keyboard and mouse, multiple displays each with their own OS). Why you would wish to use MS Windows as an actual OS (as opposed to running it in VMWare were it is safe) is beyond me, but if that is your desire then yes DMX is useless to you. But hey, with a name like Distributed Multi-headed X why would you think MS Windows would work in the first place?
The first five paragraphs of the page I linked to sum it up nicely to me
Typical X servers provide multi-head support for multiple displays attached to the same machine. When Xinerama is in use, these multiple displays are presented to the user as a single unified screen.
Xdmx is proxy X server that provides multi-head support for multiple displays attached to different machines (each of which is running a typical X server). When Xinerama is used with Xdmx, the multiple displays on multiple machines are presented to the user as a single unified screen.
A simple application for Xdmx would be to provide multi-head support using two desktop machines, each of which has a single display device attached to it.
A complex application for Xdmx would be to unify a 4 by 4 grid of 1280x1024 displays (each attached to one of 16 computers) into a unified 5120x4096 display.
Xdmx was developed and run under Linux (ia32 and x86_64) and has been tested with SGI Irix.
Basicly you run a proxy server on your main machine (not necessary, it could run on any machine, but the setup is a little more complicated). The proxy then takes over your main machines monitor and the other machines monitors. Presto you have a distributed multi-headed X server.
Lets give an example: You have a laptop and two desktops. We will call them l1, d1, and d2for short. D1 is the main machine you want to run (it has the best position) . L1 is to your left and D2 is to your right. You log on to all three and open up X on each one (no need for a WM, just an xterm is fine). You create a file named foo.cfg that looks like this
You then start up Xdmx on d1 with the following command:
Xdmx:1 +xinerama -display l1:0 -display d2:0 -configfile foo.cfg -config example
Presto, you mouse can now traverse from the laptop to the first desktop to the second desktop. You will probably want to start a real WM at this point. Any app you launch will be run on the local machine (d1), but can be dragged to any of the other machine's displays. If you want to run an app on one of the other machines then you will have to ssh into it, set the display (if X11 tunneling is set up for your copy of sshd) to d1:1, and run the app. It will display on the proxy Xdmx server and be mapped to one of the three heads (however your WM places windows).
Note that the display positions are expressed as x and y coordinates and can overlap. It gets confusing when you do this, but it can be useful when you have a small monitor that you want to use as magnification of a larger monitor. For example, this configfile
If you are running Linux (or any version of UNIX) you should look into DMX (distributed multiheaded X). You can use your old laptop as a screen attached to a newer laptop and/or a desktop (there doesn't seem to be a hard limit to the number of machines that can be linked).
Yes it is relevent becuase the question is not whether or not the data on your machine was compromised but rather how much you could protect the data on your machine when an attacker has physical access to it. You proved that you could take over the machine, hence you proved the point.
With encryption your data is only safe if the key is not left on the hard drive (or is not easily guessed). The danger of encrypting your own data is losing the data if you don't remember the key. And don't tell me that you never forget your keys: you had to root your own box to reset the password.
Ummm, you were still able to root the box. Your "sensitive" infomation was compromised. That you were told after the fact makes no difference. In fact given the knoppix route you could have stolen data and the only clue the owner would have had was the short uptime.
Yeah, but that takes more time. The point is that there is no security without physical security. many people still don't know about the "single" argument to the kernel and fewer still know that they can set a password on the bootloader (which would stop my attack).
Without physical security you have no security at all. I don't even need a boot disk to root your linux box. When the box hits the LILO or Grub protion I can interupt the boot and add "single" to boot options of the kernel. The machine will now start in single user mode (which does not require the root password). I can now make a back of shadow password file, change the root password, and telinit(8) to whatever level your distro uses for network connectivity. I can then upload your "sensitive" files to box I own. To civer my tracks I can remove my presence from all of your logs (or if I was smart, just restore backed up version of logs), restore the shadow password file, touch(1) all of the files back to their original mtimes, and voila.
Better yet, use a livecd of Linux (google for knoppix, gnoppix, morphix, or just livecd). Mount the flash-drive as your home directory (usually by passing home=/dev/sda1 to the kernel at boot time) and voila, a completely clean machine.
As long as the open-source community is so supportive of Google, it might fall under the category of 'why bother?'
I thought it was obvious. Google has made its money off of being the best search engine available. How did they do it? By creating the Page Rank algorithm. How does Page Rank work? By giving sites linked by many sources a higher value. Imagine Google had a (completely sanitised) copy of everybody's history file from their web browsers listing where they have been, at what time, for how long, and where they went next. They could use this information in a similar way to how they use Page Rank now and create an even more useful search algorithm.
Or maybe I am paranoid (goes back to reading emails in gmail).
Re:Still can't open message in a new window
on
Gmail Adds Features
·
· Score: 1
There is currently a bug in Single Window 1.4 when used with gmail. Windows are open in tabs, but the also open as windows.
Offtopic a bit, but how have you tuned Mail::SpamAssassin? My current setup catches most (say eighty percent) of the spam I get, but if I tweak it too much more then job offers tend to be marked as spam. The humourous thing is I forward my email to a yahoo account (to make it easier to check from my phone) and it catches half of what Mail::SpamAssassin misses, but thinks that some of the stuff Mail::SpamAssassin mark as SPAM is fine.
my current setup is default + required_hits 8 a mess of whitelist_froms
All the "good features" of GIF is supported by PNG in all current browsers. You'd have to go back in time fem years to find a browser that can't display a basic PNG. If you think otherwise, give me a link to one that matters that doesn't, and explain to me why, if it wasn't released/updated this year, using it isn't a security issue.
something along the lines that says "you will not insert stolen code in these products." Probably something very similar to what employees are made to sign.
That's funny, in the seven or so years I have been professionally programming I have never signed anything that said "you will not insert stolen code in these products." However, I have been required to sign things saying that the company owned my work and I had no right to it.
I'm sure somewhere out there is a horny slashdot reader already dreaming up an empirical test of your "unfounded opinion"
The downside is that it will only get them back rubs since the males aren't getting any more sex than before: "Sexual behavior did not differ between F93-96 and T93-98/F79-82."
F79-82 - Forest Troop before the death of the agressive males F93-96 - Forest Troop 7-8 years after the death of the aggressive males T93-98 - Talek Troop in the same time period
The percentage of males is now the same as it was before the aggresive ones died off from eating bad meat taken from a nearby garbage dump. There doesn't seem to be much difference between Male-Male interaction in the Forest Troop and the Talek Troop (who live 50km away). There is a major difference in the Male-Female interactions though. Females in the Forest Troop "did not seem to treat transfer males in a contingent manner" (tended to treat them like they were already part of the tribe). And all of the baboons were groomed more often leading to a less stressful environment.
Now for my unfounded opinion:
With over fifty percent of the males dead the females of the troop had lure more males in and so they started treating newcomers nicely and made sure the males already in the troop were happy. This behaviour doesn't seem to be costing them anything so it is continuing.
Sadly enough I have had a chance to find out what it is really like recently. With the downturn in the economy I lost my $80K a year job as a Developer/DBA and was forced to seek alternative employment to keep the COBRA health care while looking for another job (which took over 6 months). While employed as a temp I got to try a wide varity of jobs from loading trucks at a warehouse to data entry. I lost 30 pounds (which I almost immediatly gained back when I went behind the desk again). I found the tasks involving repetitious manual labor to be relaxing. Once my body got used to the job at hand I could put it on auto-pilot and free my mind to think about high-order things. Most of the time I was thinking about how to make the processes more efficient, but a lot of the time I thought about coding. Sometimes the two merged. It was definitely better than the worst tasks I have had to do in IT, but it also didn't give the satisfaction that the best tasks in IT have given me.
You mean, some day I'll be able to read email with my light switch? Maybe if I'm pressing it for more then 5 seconds it'll send me the message by morsing through the light bulb...
No, evolution is not the process of things getting better, it is the process of things that are not fit enough dying off. Eventually your light switch will be replaced by a houshold god^H^H^H computer that will turn lights on and off for you while reading your email aloud to you in a sexy voice. Oops. time for my meds.
The point is that they are trying to move the OS into the BIOS where it can be protected from our filthy hands. How can we circumvent the DRM if we have no access to code or the binaries? We will have to create our own BIOS chips to plug into the motherboards and we have seen what happens to mod-chippers in this country.
Slashdot Mirror
You forget there are other uses for condoms than the intended one.
Oops, wasn't logged in.
The guy who writes Code Complete does not work for Microsoft. He is published by Microsoft Press. There is a large difference between the two.
What part of "running X" makes you think they must be identically configured or even the same OS? They all must be running X (nothing else, not Gnome, not KDE, no windowmanager necessary) and have same color depth, but that is it. It makes use of the X protocol's native network functionality so in theory (this hasn't been tested well past Linux and apparently SGI's IRIX) any X Server should do. Did you even look at the example where I had two monitors one with a small display that was a part of the larger display?
As to what DMX buys you, do you know what xinerama is? This is not just the mouse cursor moving from machine to machine. You can drag windows between displays. I can start with an XTerm on the left most machine and drag it all the way over to the right most machine. Or leave it split between the two machines (this is really funky, especially if they are of different resolutions). You can maximise a window across all of the machines. This can have issues if they are not all running at the same resolution, but you can still do it, there will just be some portions you can't see on the smaller monitor. Imagine nine 15" LCDs running at 1024x768 with their frames taken off sitting in a square. With DMX (and nine machines, one fast and eight slow, or fewer if you use a multi-head card or multiple cards in one or more machines) you can have a 60" monitor with a resolution of 9216x6912. Maximise mplayer playing a DVD and presto you have a big screen tv with massive resolution (admittably a very expensive one).
If I read x2vnc's page correctly it is for people who want to use X Windows and MS Windows together in a multi-headed environment (one keyboard and mouse, multiple displays each with their own OS). Why you would wish to use MS Windows as an actual OS (as opposed to running it in VMWare were it is safe) is beyond me, but if that is your desire then yes DMX is useless to you. But hey, with a name like Distributed Multi-headed X why would you think MS Windows would work in the first place?
Basicly you run a proxy server on your main machine (not necessary, it could run on any machine, but the setup is a little more complicated). The proxy then takes over your main machines monitor and the other machines monitors. Presto you have a distributed multi-headed X server.
Lets give an example:
You have a laptop and two desktops. We will call them l1, d1, and d2for short. D1 is the main machine you want to run (it has the best position) . L1 is to your left and D2 is to your right. You log on to all three and open up X on each one (no need for a WM, just an xterm is fine). You create a file named foo.cfg that looks like thisYou then start up Xdmx on d1 with the following command:Presto, you mouse can now traverse from the laptop to the first desktop to the second desktop. You will probably want to start a real WM at this point. Any app you launch will be run on the local machine (d1), but can be dragged to any of the other machine's displays. If you want to run an app on one of the other machines then you will have to ssh into it, set the display (if X11 tunneling is set up for your copy of sshd) to d1:1, and run the app. It will display on the proxy Xdmx server and be mapped to one of the three heads (however your WM places windows).
Note that the display positions are expressed as x and y coordinates and can overlap. It gets confusing when you do this, but it can be useful when you have a small monitor that you want to use as magnification of a larger monitor. For example, this configfileshows a larger (appearing) verson of the first 800 by 600 pixels of d1's display on l1. There are reasons to do this, but not many.
If you are running Linux (or any version of UNIX) you should look into DMX (distributed multiheaded X). You can use your old laptop as a screen attached to a newer laptop and/or a desktop (there doesn't seem to be a hard limit to the number of machines that can be linked).
Yes it is relevent becuase the question is not whether or not the data on your machine was compromised but rather how much you could protect the data on your machine when an attacker has physical access to it. You proved that you could take over the machine, hence you proved the point.
With encryption your data is only safe if the key is not left on the hard drive (or is not easily guessed). The danger of encrypting your own data is losing the data if you don't remember the key. And don't tell me that you never forget your keys: you had to root your own box to reset the password.
Ummm, you were still able to root the box. Your "sensitive" infomation was compromised. That you were told after the fact makes no difference. In fact given the knoppix route you could have stolen data and the only clue the owner would have had was the short uptime.
Yeah, but that takes more time. The point is that there is no security without physical security. many people still don't know about the "single" argument to the kernel and fewer still know that they can set a password on the bootloader (which would stop my attack).
Without physical security you have no security at all. I don't even need a boot disk to root your linux box. When the box hits the LILO or Grub protion I can interupt the boot and add "single" to boot options of the kernel. The machine will now start in single user mode (which does not require the root password). I can now make a back of shadow password file, change the root password, and telinit(8) to whatever level your distro uses for network connectivity. I can then upload your "sensitive" files to box I own. To civer my tracks I can remove my presence from all of your logs (or if I was smart, just restore backed up version of logs), restore the shadow password file, touch(1) all of the files back to their original mtimes, and voila.
Better yet, use a livecd of Linux (google for knoppix, gnoppix, morphix, or just livecd). Mount the flash-drive as your home directory (usually by passing home=/dev/sda1 to the kernel at boot time) and voila, a completely clean machine.
I thought it was obvious. Google has made its money off of being the best search engine available. How did they do it? By creating the Page Rank algorithm. How does Page Rank work? By giving sites linked by many sources a higher value. Imagine Google had a (completely sanitised) copy of everybody's history file from their web browsers listing where they have been, at what time, for how long, and where they went next. They could use this information in a similar way to how they use Page Rank now and create an even more useful search algorithm.
Or maybe I am paranoid (goes back to reading emails in gmail).
There is currently a bug in Single Window 1.4 when used with gmail. Windows are open in tabs, but the also open as windows.
Offtopic a bit, but how have you tuned Mail::SpamAssassin? My current setup catches most (say eighty percent) of the spam I get, but if I tweak it too much more then job offers tend to be marked as spam. The humourous thing is I forward my email to a yahoo account (to make it easier to check from my phone) and it catches half of what Mail::SpamAssassin misses, but thinks that some of the stuff Mail::SpamAssassin mark as SPAM is fine.
my current setup is default +
required_hits 8
a mess of whitelist_froms
Since DSL only uses FB and VESA you are probably better off using kdrive . It is designed to be small and lightweight.
http://lynx.isc.org/release/
But then again it doesn't support GIF either.
That's funny, in the seven or so years I have been professionally programming I have never signed anything that said "you will not insert stolen code in these products." However, I have been required to sign things saying that the company owned my work and I had no right to it.
Um, I think the word you are thinking if is frell not fark. www.fark.com is a news/link farm site like Slashdot.
The downside is that it will only get them back rubs since the males aren't getting any more sex than before: "Sexual behavior did not differ between F93-96 and T93-98/F79-82."
F79-82 - Forest Troop before the death of the agressive males
F93-96 - Forest Troop 7-8 years after the death of the aggressive males
T93-98 - Talek Troop in the same time period
The percentage of males is now the same as it was before the aggresive ones died off from eating bad meat taken from a nearby garbage dump. There doesn't seem to be much difference between Male-Male interaction in the Forest Troop and the Talek Troop (who live 50km away). There is a major difference in the Male-Female interactions though. Females in the Forest Troop "did not seem to treat transfer males in a contingent manner" (tended to treat them like they were already part of the tribe). And all of the baboons were groomed more often leading to a less stressful environment.
Now for my unfounded opinion:
With over fifty percent of the males dead the females of the troop had lure more males in and so they started treating newcomers nicely and made sure the males already in the troop were happy. This behaviour doesn't seem to be costing them anything so it is continuing.
Who are you kidding? Most Slashdot readers are already breeding like Amigas. By the way, when was the last time you saw an Amiga in the wild?
Sadly enough I have had a chance to find out what it is really like recently. With the downturn in the economy I lost my $80K a year job as a Developer/DBA and was forced to seek alternative employment to keep the COBRA health care while looking for another job (which took over 6 months). While employed as a temp I got to try a wide varity of jobs from loading trucks at a warehouse to data entry. I lost 30 pounds (which I almost immediatly gained back when I went behind the desk again). I found the tasks involving repetitious manual labor to be relaxing. Once my body got used to the job at hand I could put it on auto-pilot and free my mind to think about high-order things. Most of the time I was thinking about how to make the processes more efficient, but a lot of the time I thought about coding. Sometimes the two merged. It was definitely better than the worst tasks I have had to do in IT, but it also didn't give the satisfaction that the best tasks in IT have given me.
No, evolution is not the process of things getting better, it is the process of things that are not fit enough dying off. Eventually your light switch will be replaced by a houshold god^H^H^H computer that will turn lights on and off for you while reading your email aloud to you in a sexy voice. Oops. time for my meds.
The point is that they are trying to move the OS into the BIOS where it can be protected from our filthy hands. How can we circumvent the DRM if we have no access to code or the binaries? We will have to create our own BIOS chips to plug into the motherboards and we have seen what happens to mod-chippers in this country.