Dave Feustel wrote:
Having spent some time running X on OpenBSD, FreeBSD, Fedora, and now SUSE 11,
I am convinced that using X on any of these platforms enables exploits that
cannot be disabled. You cannot have both security and X. Take your pick. I do
not log in as root in X for any reason
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 09/15/2008 06:46 AM, Dave Feustel wrote:
On Mon, Sep 15, 2008 at 03:31:18PM +0530, Huzaifa Sidhpurwala wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Fedora Weekly News Issue 143
Welcome to Fedora Weekly
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FWN/Issue143
This week Announcements trumpets the arrival of a new version of Bodhi,
the freeze of Rawhide and some essential reading on the new package
keys. In Developments we shock you with
Non-X System Consoles to be Removed.
What is the point of removing
Aldo Foot wrote:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FWN/Issue143
This week Announcements trumpets the arrival of a new version of Bodhi,
the freeze of Rawhide and some essential reading on the new package
keys. In Developments we shock you with
Non-X System Consoles to be Removed.
What is the
On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 5:14 PM, Rahul Sundaram
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Aldo Foot wrote:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FWN/Issue143
This week Announcements trumpets the arrival of a new version of Bodhi,
the freeze of Rawhide and some essential reading on the new package
keys. In
On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 8:58 AM, Mike Burger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 8:28 AM, Mike Burger
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 9:40 AM, Mike Burger
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Mike Burger wrote:
What is the point of removing the System Consoles?
On Tue, 2008-09-16 at 09:11 -0400, Mike Burger wrote:
As I said...I don't agree with it...I'm just saying that I understand
the thinking behind it.
Sorry, but I think you don't. You might want to read Alan Cox's message
on the fedora-test list:
On Tue, 2008-09-16 at 09:34 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
On Tue, 2008-09-16 at 09:11 -0400, Mike Burger wrote:
As I said...I don't agree with it...I'm just saying that I understand
the thinking behind it.
Sorry, but I think you don't. You might want to read Alan Cox's message
on the
On Tue, 2008-09-16 at 10:40 -0400, Lyvim Xaphir wrote:
On Tue, 2008-09-16 at 09:34 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
On Tue, 2008-09-16 at 09:11 -0400, Mike Burger wrote:
As I said...I don't agree with it...I'm just saying that I understand
the thinking behind it.
Sorry, but I think
On Tue, 2008-09-16 at 09:11 -0400, Mike Burger wrote:
As I said...I don't agree with it...I'm just saying that I understand
the thinking behind it.
Sorry, but I think you don't. You might want to read Alan Cox's message
on the fedora-test list:
Mike Burger wrote:
On Tue, 2008-09-16 at 09:11 -0400, Mike Burger wrote:
As I said...I don't agree with it...I'm just saying that I understand
the thinking behind it.
Sorry, but I think you don't. You might want to read Alan Cox's message
on the fedora-test list:
Lyvim Xaphir wrote:
On Tue, 2008-09-16 at 09:34 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
On Tue, 2008-09-16 at 09:11 -0400, Mike Burger wrote:
As I said...I don't agree with it...I'm just saying that I understand
the thinking behind it.
Sorry, but I think you don't. You might want to read Alan Cox's
Mike Burger wrote:
On Tue, 2008-09-16 at 09:11 -0400, Mike Burger wrote:
As I said...I don't agree with it...I'm just saying that I understand
the thinking behind it.
Sorry, but I think you don't. You might want to read Alan Cox's message
on the fedora-test list:
On Tue, 16 Sep 2008 10:20:06 -0700
Rick Stevens [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For example, PCI compliance says that you must render the
machines as physically difficult to get into as you can.
So, you let the Italian Communist Party dictate what you
do? :-).
--
fedora-list mailing list
Tom Horsley wrote:
On Tue, 16 Sep 2008 10:20:06 -0700
Rick Stevens [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For example, PCI compliance says that you must render the
machines as physically difficult to get into as you can.
So, you let the Italian Communist Party dictate what you
do? :-).
That's what I
On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 10:20:06AM -0700, Rick Stevens wrote:
Lyvim Xaphir wrote:
On Tue, 2008-09-16 at 09:34 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
On Tue, 2008-09-16 at 09:11 -0400, Mike Burger wrote:
As I said...I don't agree with it...I'm just saying that I understand
the thinking behind it.
Dave Feustel wrote:
[snip]
1. Machines do not have X installed and boot to run level 3
Having spent some time running X on OpenBSD, FreeBSD, Fedora, and now SUSE 11,
I am convinced that using X on any of these platforms enables exploits that
cannot be disabled. You cannot have both security
On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 05:50:18PM -0700, Rick Stevens wrote:
Dave Feustel wrote:
[snip]
1. Machines do not have X installed and boot to run level 3
I did not write the above point 1.
I did write the following:
Having spent some time running X on OpenBSD, FreeBSD, Fedora, and now SUSE
11,
18 matches
Mail list logo
