Hi,
I was using CentOS 7 and when I ran some custom commercial security scan on
my machine, I found about 122 vulnerabilities.
Can you help me on how to get security upgrades on top of my existing
CentOS?
# cat /etc/redhat-release
CentOS Linux release 7.1.1503 (Core)
Thanks for the help.
--
On 04/24/15 06:07, E.B. wrote:
I'm sure most people here know about Dash in Debian. Have there
been discussions about providing a more efficient shell in Centos
for use with heavily invoked non-interactive scripts?
With sh being a link to bash in Centos I don't know if it would
explode if the
2015-04-24 12:21 GMT+03:00 Venkateswara Rao Dokku dvrao@gmail.com:
Hi,
I was using CentOS 7 and when I ran some custom commercial security scan on
my machine, I found about 122 vulnerabilities.
Can you help me on how to get security upgrades on top of my existing
CentOS?
# cat
I'm sure most people here know about Dash in Debian. Have there
been discussions about providing a more efficient shell in Centos
for use with heavily invoked non-interactive scripts?
With sh being a link to bash in Centos I don't know if it would
explode if the link was changed to something
Stephen Harris li...@spuddy.org wrote:
Bash was bigger than ksh in the non-commercial Unix world because of ksh88
licensing problems. Back in 1998 I wanted to teach a ksh scripting
course to my local LUG, but ATT (David Korn himsef!) told me I couldn't
give people copies of the shell to take
Pete Geenhuizen p...@geenhuizen.net wrote:
Initially Bourne was used because it was typically a static binary,
because the boot process didn't have access to any shared libraries.
When that changed it became a bit of a moot point, and you started to
see other interpreters being used.
Stephen Harris li...@spuddy.org wrote:
AFAIR, ksh was OSS (but not using an OSI approved license) since 1997.
Since
In 1998 each user had to sign a license; you couldn't give away copies
to other people.
Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 14:09:30 -0400 (EDT)
From: David Korn
2015-04-24 15:31 GMT+03:00 Jim Perrin jper...@centos.org:
On 04/24/2015 04:21 AM, Venkateswara Rao Dokku wrote:
Hi,
I was using CentOS 7 and when I ran some custom commercial security scan
on
my machine, I found about 122 vulnerabilities.
Can you help me on how to get security
On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 7:02 AM, mark m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
I'm sure most people here know about Dash in Debian. Have there
been discussions about providing a more efficient shell in Centos
for use with heavily invoked non-interactive scripts?
With sh being a link to bash in Centos I don't
On 04/24/15 06:57, Pete Geenhuizen wrote:
On 04/24/15 06:07, E.B. wrote:
I'm sure most people here know about Dash in Debian. Have there
been discussions about providing a more efficient shell in Centos
for use with heavily invoked non-interactive scripts?
With sh being a link to bash in
It was the mid/late-90s, but I seem to recall Bourne being the default
shell, although sh/ksh/csh were all available with a typical install.
On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 8:32 AM, Scott Robbins scot...@nyc.rr.com wrote:
On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 08:02:56AM -0400, mark wrote:
On 04/24/15 06:57, Pete
On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 08:32:45AM -0400, Scott Robbins wrote:
Wasn't Solaris, which for awhile at least, was probably the most popular
Unix, using ksh by default?
Solaris /bin/sh was a real real dumb version of the bourne shell.
Solaris included /bin/ksh as part of the core distribution (ksh88
On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 08:02:56AM -0400, mark wrote:
On 04/24/15 06:57, Pete Geenhuizen wrote:
On 04/24/15 06:07, E.B. wrote:
I'm sure most people here know about Dash in Debian. Have there
been discussions about providing a more efficient shell in Centos
for use with heavily invoked
Initially Bourne was used because it was typically a static binary,
because the boot process didn't have access to any shared libraries.
When that changed it became a bit of a moot point, and you started to
see other interpreters being used.
Even though Solaris started using ksh as the
Stephen Harris li...@spuddy.org wrote:
On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 08:32:45AM -0400, Scott Robbins wrote:
Wasn't Solaris, which for awhile at least, was probably the most popular
Unix, using ksh by default?
Solaris /bin/sh was a real real dumb version of the bourne shell.
Solaris included
On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 03:15:27PM +0200, Joerg Schilling wrote:
Stephen Harris li...@spuddy.org wrote:
Bash was bigger than ksh in the non-commercial Unix world because of ksh88
licensing problems. Back in 1998 I wanted to teach a ksh scripting
course to my local LUG, but ATT (David
TCP timestamps on some (but not all?) of our CentOs hosts are being
reported as a vulnerability by OSSIM. I have looked into the matter
briefly and cannot say that I consider this a serious security issue.
The vulnerability seems limited to determining the uptime of the
target host. The question
On 04/24/2015 04:21 AM, Venkateswara Rao Dokku wrote:
Hi,
I was using CentOS 7 and when I ran some custom commercial security scan on
my machine, I found about 122 vulnerabilities.
Can you help me on how to get security upgrades on top of my existing
CentOS?
# cat /etc/redhat-release
On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 08:54:48AM -0400, Pete Geenhuizen wrote:
Even though Solaris started using ksh as the default user environment,
almost all of the start scrips were either bourne or bash scripts. With
Bash having more functionality the scripts typically used the
environment that
Stephen Harris li...@spuddy.org wrote:
Solaris /bin/sh was a real real dumb version of the bourne shell.
If you like to create portable scripts, you can do this by downloading:
https://sourceforge.net/projects/schilytools/files/
and using osh as a reference implementation. Osh is the
On 04/24/2015 04:21 AM, Venkateswara Rao Dokku wrote:
Hi,
I was using CentOS 7 and when I ran some custom commercial security scan on
my machine, I found about 122 vulnerabilities.
Can you help me on how to get security upgrades on top of my existing
CentOS?
The short answer: 'yum
What does your /etc/idmapd.conf look like on the server side?
I fought with this quite a bit a while ago, but my use case was a bit
different, and I was working with CentOS 5 and 6.
Still, the kicker for me was updating the [Translation] section of
/etc/idmapd.conf. Mine looks like this:
m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
Fascinating. As I'd been in Sun OS, and started doing admin work when it
became Solaris, I'd missed that bit. A question: did the license agreement
include payment, or was it just restrictive on distribution?
Everything other than ksh93 is closed source. The POSIX
On Fri, April 24, 2015 12:04 pm, John R Pierce wrote:
On 4/24/2015 9:47 AM, Gordon Messmer wrote:
On 04/24/2015 03:57 AM, Pete Geenhuizen wrote:
if you leave it out the script will run in whatever environment it
currently is in.
I'm reasonably certain that a script with no shebang will run
I believe if you re-read a little more closely, the whole point of the
exercise was not to have the #! at the top of the script.
On 04/24/2015 01:36 PM, Valeri Galtsev wrote:
On Fri, April 24, 2015 12:04 pm, John R Pierce wrote:
On 4/24/2015 9:47 AM, Gordon Messmer wrote:
On 04/24/2015 03:57
On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 12:04 PM, John R Pierce pie...@hogranch.com wrote:
On 4/24/2015 9:47 AM, Gordon Messmer wrote:
On 04/24/2015 03:57 AM, Pete Geenhuizen wrote:
if you leave it out the script will run in whatever environment it
currently is in.
I'm reasonably certain that a script
I thought I'd post to the mail list because I know there are some that
only respond this way.
I have a new SuperMicro X10-DRI host with a 3Ware controller that hangs
when I try to install CentOS 7 on it. I've documented everything here:
https://www.centos.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=49t=52231
On 4/24/2015 3:07 AM, E.B. wrote:
I'm sure most people here know about Dash in Debian. Have there
been discussions about providing a more efficient shell in Centos
for use with heavily invoked non-interactive scripts?
perl or python are much better choices for complex scripts that need
Stephen Harris wrote:
On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 03:15:27PM +0200, Joerg Schilling wrote:
Stephen Harris li...@spuddy.org wrote:
Bash was bigger than ksh in the non-commercial Unix world because of
ksh88 licensing problems. Back in 1998 I wanted to teach a ksh
scripting
course to my local
Matt Garman wrote:
What does your /etc/idmapd.conf look like on the server side?
I fought with this quite a bit a while ago, but my use case was a bit
different, and I was working with CentOS 5 and 6.
Still, the kicker for me was updating the [Translation] section of
/etc/idmapd.conf. Mine
On 04/25/15 00:50, Mark LaPierre wrote:
Hey all,
With google-earth-stable.x86_64 0:7.1.2.2041-0
[mlapier@peach /]$ /usr/bin/google-earth
[0425/000212:ERROR:net_util.cc(2195)] Not implemented reached in bool
net::HaveOnlyLoopbackAddresses()
Failed to load
Hey all,
With google-earth-stable.x86_64 0:7.1.2.2041-0
[mlapier@peach /]$ /usr/bin/google-earth
[0425/000212:ERROR:net_util.cc(2195)] Not implemented reached in bool
net::HaveOnlyLoopbackAddresses()
Failed to load /opt/google/earth/free/libinput_plugin.so because
/usr/lib64/libstdc++.so.6:
On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 11:12 AM, John R Pierce pie...@hogranch.com wrote:
On 4/24/2015 3:07 AM, E.B. wrote:
I'm sure most people here know about Dash in Debian. Have there
been discussions about providing a more efficient shell in Centos
for use with heavily invoked non-interactive scripts?
On 04/24/2015 03:57 AM, Pete Geenhuizen wrote:
if you leave it out the script will run in whatever environment it
currently is in.
I'm reasonably certain that a script with no shebang will run with
/bin/sh. I interpret your statement to mean that if a user is using ksh
and enters the path
On 4/24/2015 10:47 AM, Gordon Messmer wrote:
On 04/24/2015 03:57 AM, Pete Geenhuizen wrote:
if you leave it out the script will run in whatever environment it
currently is in.
I'm reasonably certain that a script with no shebang will run with
/bin/sh. I interpret your statement to mean that
On 4/24/2015 9:47 AM, Gordon Messmer wrote:
On 04/24/2015 03:57 AM, Pete Geenhuizen wrote:
if you leave it out the script will run in whatever environment it
currently is in.
I'm reasonably certain that a script with no shebang will run with
/bin/sh. I interpret your statement to mean that
Am 24.04.2015 um 11:21 schrieb Venkateswara Rao Dokku:
I was using CentOS 7 and when I ran some custom commercial security scan on
my machine, I found about 122 vulnerabilities.
That's why those scans are wasted money. From a security management
point of view they neither help you nor your
On 4/24/2015 12:14 PM, Alexander Dalloz wrote:
Am 24.04.2015 um 11:21 schrieb Venkateswara Rao Dokku:
I was using CentOS 7 and when I ran some custom commercial security
scan on
my machine, I found about 122 vulnerabilities.
That's why those scans are wasted money. From a security management
On 04/24/2015 09:59 AM, Steve Lindemann wrote:
A script with no shebang will run in the environment of the account
running the script.
Bad test on my part, apparently.
$ python
import os
os.execv('/home/gmessmer/test', ('test',))
Traceback (most recent call last):
File stdin, line 1, in
Hi
I am using a two node cluster to achieve high availability.
I am basically testing a scenario where in if i shutdown my node
(node-1) then the other node (node-2) should start functioning like
node-1. Currently what i am observing is that the entire cluster gets
into Stopped state.
Here
Interesting thread i started! Sorry if my question was too vague: --
On Fri, 4/24/15, Joerg Schilling joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de wrote:
The Bourne Shell is also much faster than bash. In special on platforms like
Cygwin, where Microsoft enforces extremly slow process creation.
This
On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 3:04 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
My first RH was 5, late nineties. First time I looked at linux and
installed, it was '95, and slack. (We'll ignore the Coherent that I
installed on my beloved 286 in the late 80's).
snip
You mean you missed all the fun with Xenix on
On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 3:45 PM, E.B. emailbuilde...@yahoo.com wrote:
Interesting thread i started! Sorry if my question was too vague: --
On Fri, 4/24/15, Joerg Schilling joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de wrote:
The Bourne Shell is also much faster than bash. In special on platforms like
Les Mikesell wrote:
On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 3:04 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
My first RH was 5, late nineties. First time I looked at linux and
installed, it was '95, and slack. (We'll ignore the Coherent that I
installed on my beloved 286 in the late 80's).
snip
You mean you missed all
On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 10:38:25AM -0400, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
Fascinating. As I'd been in Sun OS, and started doing admin work when it
became Solaris, I'd missed that bit. A question: did the license agreement
include payment, or was it just restrictive on distribution?
In 1990, when I
John R Pierce wrote:
On 4/24/2015 12:14 PM, Alexander Dalloz wrote:
Am 24.04.2015 um 11:21 schrieb Venkateswara Rao Dokku:
I was using CentOS 7 and when I ran some custom commercial security
scan on
my machine, I found about 122 vulnerabilities.
That's why those scans are wasted money. From
On 04/24/15 05:59, Les Mikesell wrote:
The original ksh wasn't open source and might even have been an
extra-cost item in ATT unix. And the early emulations weren't
always complete so you couldn't count on script portability. I
generally thought it was safer to use perl for anything that took
On 4/24/2015 12:32 PM, Gordon Messmer wrote:
On 04/24/2015 09:59 AM, Steve Lindemann wrote:
A script with no shebang will run in the environment of the account
running the script.
Bad test on my part, apparently.
$ python
import os
os.execv('/home/gmessmer/test', ('test',))
Traceback
On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 09:47:24AM -0700, Gordon Messmer wrote:
On 04/24/2015 03:57 AM, Pete Geenhuizen wrote:
if you leave it out the script will run in whatever environment it
currently is in.
I'm reasonably certain that a script with no shebang will run with
/bin/sh. I interpret your
Stephen Harris wrote:
On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 10:38:25AM -0400, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
Fascinating. As I'd been in Sun OS, and started doing admin work when it
became Solaris, I'd missed that bit. A question: did the license
agreement include payment, or was it just restrictive on
--On Friday, April 24, 2015 10:03:09 AM -0500 Matt Garman
matthew.gar...@gmail.com wrote:
[...]
Still, the kicker for me was updating the [Translation] section of
/etc/idmapd.conf. Mine looks like this:
[Translation]
Method = nsswitch
GSS-Methods = nsswitch,static
[...]
Again, since
Il 22/04/2015 17:31, George Dunlap ha scritto:
On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 2:28 PM, Sandro Bonazzola sbona...@redhat.com wrote:
Hi,
I see that for EL6 gwd already has pushed a libvirtd package with version
1.2.10[1].
I got request from VDSM development to provide libvirt = 1.2.9 for EL7 for
On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 05:09:56PM +0100, George Dunlap wrote:
I've got Xen 4.4.2 in virt6-testing. I haven't had a chance to test
it, and won't for another week or two; but if some volunteers can put
it through its paces, I can ask Johnny to push it to the public repo
sometome early next
53 matches
Mail list logo
