Re: (fsf site) Advice requested on security issues
The sad thing is you are being more careful with your system design than your bank probably is. :-/ By the time you are running OpenBSD on your banking computer, I suspect you have shifted the primary risk to the other end of the wire...your bank is a bigger risk to your data than you are. Especially if the web programmers didn't take care to check every POST/GET variable for SQL injection or other injections like simple html injection, javascript injection.. No matter what operating system they use on the banking server, any web script that allows any form of malicious injection (through a post/get) is problematic. An example: http://z505.com/gng/fsf-gnu-site-easy-to-hack.htm The FSF site is easily hacked to recommend OpenBSD as the operating system of choice. Many banks I checked were injection safe, from limited testing I did. I was however able to find an exploit with the Royal Bank of Canada's website, more than a year ago, unrelated to injection. It was a perl script that hadn't been checked close enough by their programmers and allowed money to be created on the fly, believe it or not. That's pretty scary. Alphanumeric (plus underscores) by default, is one good way to secure most form/url processing scripts. Sure some form/url processing scripts require more than alphanumeric.. such as punctuation. But tons of sites are insecure mainly because they allow more than alphanumeric, numeric, or alphabetic by default. L505 p.s.I checked the openbsd site for many vulnerabilities once, and found nothing after white hat attempts. Someone must have carefully coded the url/post/get processing on the scripts that run the openbsd site. Usually I can inject something into any site within a few seconds/minutes.. but not on openbsd.org.. and quite frankly I wasn't so surprised.
Re: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Re: Real men don't attack straw men]
For example, his Wikipedia article is one sided propaganda: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_stallman Yeah maybe, but so's the uncyclopedia version! ;) http://uncyclopedia.org/wiki/Richard_Stallman -B
Re: FW: Real men don't attack straw men
On Jan 5, 2008 11:24 AM, Richard Stallman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I was a bit curious about what would someone who reads web-sites by using a wget daemon through e-mails whose own web-site looks like... well... Apache httpd 2.0.54 ((Debian GNU/Linux) DAV/2 SVN/1.2.0 PHP/4.3.10-22 mod_ssl/2.0.54 OpenSSL/0.9.7e) I use wget for personal reasons. I have nothing against running a web site. I don't endorse Debian, but I don't object to getting free software from Debian (or from OpenBSD) and installing it. BUT I WILL STILL GO ON SPREADING THE LIE THAT OpenBSD CONTAINS NON-FREE SOFTWARE SO PEOPLE ARE MISLEAD As for Subversion, I don't know why it is mentioned there, but I have nothing against using Subversion. It is free software. This continues the pattern of straw men. Over and over, people on this list criticize me for doing something which neither I nor anyone else here actually thinks is wrong. Please cut off that anyone else from the above statement. If you haven't forgotten counting then please count the no. mails you got from people who think you are wrong
Re: Real men don't attack straw men
On Jan 5, 2008 11:24 AM, Richard Stallman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The wget he uses is worse. You can download any non-free software with it and it does not warn the user at all!!! I don't object to general-purpose tools just for being general. How about OpenBSD ports system a general purpose tool given by developers to the users?
Re: Real men don't attack straw men
On Jan 5, 2008 11:25 AM, Richard Stallman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://directory.fsf.org/project/Windows32API/ http://directory.fsf.org/project/wxwindows/ http://wxwindows.org/about/credits.htm see the acknowledgment from one of the softwares endorsed by FSF your favourite organization. == Thank you to Microsoft for donating a copy of Visual C++ 6.0 to help wxWidgets compile on this version of the compiler (for a Virginia Tech course). We do not refuse to list a program merely because it mentions a non-free platforms on which it runs. I've explained that already. Developing a program ( real software ) for a non-free platform is big encouragement by loud communication ( actions speak better than words ) to use or continue using that non-free platform. ( Which is exactly what gcc and emacs does by the way ) And you endorse such software that promotes other non-free platforms through your FSF website. But you cannot stand when a Project which has done more than any other project to : 1) Stand for freedom 2) Take enormous steps to improve quality and security of software given out freely. 2) Stand against blobs even when Linux and FreeBSD people wimped out. 3) Worked ( some times with the support of their community ) to get numerous closed hardware documentation freely available for developers so that they can write free software and maintain it. 4) Taken the pains to reverse engineer and write free drivers for new hardware support. has a few free URLs in its ports system which they DONOT recommend as the primary way to install software but warns the user if they try to compile non-free software? And you even go to the extend of spreading a lie that this Operating system CONTAINS free software? There is some thing terribly wrong with your logic. That is why I asked to take a Bipolar Disorder test in the beginning. By the way ( Perhaps, I don't know which ) some of the free drivers that Gnuisance has were made possible only through the efforts of the OpenBSD project freeing up documentation from the vendors. And even in those efforts the Linux people had worked against them encouraging vendors to give out blobs and to keep documentation closed. Have you investigated about them at any point? I know this Demon+wget system will not allow you to do much research. So Switch back to some thing sane. Do some good reading. Prepare before an Interview. Unless you deliberately want to start spreading lies and ruin the reputation of projects who are sincerely standing and fighting for freedom consistent to what they say!!! I don't like the warm and positive attitude towards Microsoft expressed by that thank-you. If wxwindows were a GNU package I would ask the developers to change that. But wxwindows is not a GNU package, and I doubt I have veryx much credit with its developers. I'd rather not use it on this. Please remove it ( and all similar software ) from the FSF website because it encourages people to use non-free platforms ( which is worse ) with a wrong feeling that they are actually encouraging use of free software by using those . Be consistent. I know its hard but try it :-) And publicly apologize that you made a mistake by telling that OpenBSD CONTAINS non-free software because their platform is free the packages they recommend are free. And if at all somebody uses the ports system they are warned while installing non-free software unlike your FSF website where you give the wrong impression to people and justify your hippocricy.
Re: Open Source Article Spawns Interesting Ethical Question
When someone asked him how to make a living of IT without using or promoting non-free software, his answer was that you don't have to work in the IT field to contribute to free software, and he'd prefer see a kernel contributor being a taxi driver than administrating Windows workstations (It may not be the very same words, but the intent is the same). Luckily for Linux RMS doesn't have a say in who works on the kernel. If he had I guess Linux would now have been what GNU HURD is: unknown and irrelevant. --- Lars Hansson
Re: FW: Real men don't attack straw men
On Jan 5, 2008 7:54 AM, Richard Stallman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Apache httpd 2.0.54 ((Debian GNU/Linux) DAV/2 SVN/1.2.0 PHP/4.3.10-22 mod_ssl/2.0.54 OpenSSL/0.9.7e) I have nothing against running a web site. you have *nothing* against a distribution that makes it easier to install non-free (by FSF meaning) software? then why separate to those who you recommend and those you don't? so you do have something against? then why do you use it and get benefit off it for free? I don't endorse Debian, but I don't object to getting free software from Debian (or from OpenBSD) and installing it. there is a misconception, you need to think it through more thoroughly. otherwise if it sounds like shit and it looks like shit then it must be shit (boogie nights movie) As for Subversion, I don't know why it is mentioned there, but I have nothing against using Subversion. It is free software. http://fitz.blogspot.com/2007/07/stallman-shoots-free-software-movement.html This continues the pattern of straw men. yup, you make yourself look like the straw man which needs to go to the wizard of oz to ask for a brain... Over and over, people on this list criticize me for doing something which neither I nor anyone else here actually thinks is wrong. you get criticized because you do criticize when you're not in position to do it. your principles are so fuzzy and you spin and stretch words to make them fit your agenda.
sendmail in base not supporting AUTH?
Hi! I wish to use sendmail in base to use a SMART_HOST (my isp's smtp server), and that SMART_HOST requires authentication. I was told that sendmail must be compiled with SASL support even if it is only acting as and smtp client when using AUTH. Is it right? Am I stuck here, and won't be able configure sendmail to support AUTH as an smtp client? Thanks! Daniel
Re: FW: Real men don't attack straw men
On Sat, 5 Jan 2008 12:09:16 +0200, Denis Doroshenko wrote: On Jan 5, 2008 7:54 AM, Richard Stallman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Apache httpd 2.0.54 ((Debian GNU/Linux) DAV/2 SVN/1.2.0 PHP/4.3.10-22 mod_ssl/2.0.54 OpenSSL/0.9.7e) I have nothing against running a web site. you have *nothing* against a distribution that makes it easier to install non-free (by FSF meaning) software? then why separate to those who you recommend and those you don't? so you do have something against? then why do you use it and get benefit off it for free? I don't endorse Debian, but I don't object to getting free software from Debian (or from OpenBSD) and installing it. there is a misconception, you need to think it through more thoroughly. otherwise if it sounds like shit and it looks like shit then it must be shit (boogie nights movie) As for Subversion, I don't know why it is mentioned there, but I have nothing against using Subversion. It is free software. http://fitz.blogspot.com/2007/07/stallman-shoots-free-software-movement.html This continues the pattern of straw men. yup, you make yourself look like the straw man which needs to go to the wizard of oz to ask for a brain... Over and over, people on this list criticize me for doing something which neither I nor anyone else here actually thinks is wrong. you get criticized because you do criticize when you're not in position to do it. your principles are so fuzzy and you spin and stretch words to make them fit your agenda. Thanks Denis, for a prime example of how it is not just the misc@ list that gets wishywashy BS about misremembering and lack of rigor in research (if any was done at all). Looks like the RMS MO, I'd say, but maybe it is Old Timer's Disease creeping up. Rod/ /earth: write failed, file system is full cp: /earth/creatures: No space left on device
Re: sendmail in base not supporting AUTH?
On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 12:00:39PM +0100, Daniel wrote: Hi! I wish to use sendmail in base to use a SMART_HOST (my isp's smtp server), and that SMART_HOST requires authentication. I was told that sendmail must be compiled with SASL support even if it is only acting as and smtp client when using AUTH. Is it right? Am I stuck here, and won't be able configure sendmail to support AUTH as an smtp client? yes, that is right, -Otto
Re: sendmail in base not supporting AUTH?
On Sat, 5 Jan 2008, Daniel wrote: I wish to use sendmail in base to use a SMART_HOST (my isp's smtp server), and that SMART_HOST requires authentication. I was told that sendmail must be compiled with SASL support even if it is only acting as and smtp client when using AUTH. Is it right? Am I stuck here, and won't be able configure sendmail to support AUTH as an smtp client? See src/gnu/usr.sbin/sendmail/sendmail/Makefile: To build with SASL support define WANT_SMTPAUTH in /etc/mk.conf (unsupported) -- Antoine
Re: Richard Stallman...
On Fri, Jan 04, 2008 at 05:49:42PM -0600, Gilles Chehade wrote: Why didn't you answer my mail Rui ? You are a troll. Either I did and you missed it, or it wasn't the answer you'd expect or I found it so irrelevant it didn't even raise any bell. Anyways, most of your emails have been so rude that in afterthought I shouldn't even honour you with a reply. Rui -- Fnord. Today is Setting Orange, the 5th day of Chaos in the YOLD 3174 Celebrate Mungday + No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown + Whatever you do will be insignificant, | but it is very important that you do it -- Gandhi + So let's do it...?
Running dhclient on CARP interfaces
While trying to transpose a working two-stage active-passive firewall from an enterprise network with a _fixed_ public Internet address to a much smaller home setup that must live with a _dynamic_ public IP address assigned by the DHCP server of my ISP, I observe that running dhclient(8) on carp(4) interface does not work as expected: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:root]# ifconfig carp11 carpdev fxp0 vhid 11 up [EMAIL PROTECTED]:root]# ifconfig carp11 carp11: flags=8803UP,BROADCAST,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST mtu 1500 lladdr 00:00:5e:00:01:0b carp: INIT carpdev fxp0 vhid 11 advbase 1 advskew 0 groups: carp inet6 fe80::200:5eff:fe00:10b%carp11 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x8 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:root]# ifconfig fxp0 fxp0: flags=8943UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,PROMISC,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST mtu 1500 lladdr 00:20:e0:68:fe:6c groups: egress media: Ethernet autoselect (100baseTX full-duplex) status: active inet6 fe80::220:e0ff:fe68:fe6c%fxp0 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x1 inet 10.0.0.201 netmask 0xff00 broadcast 10.0.0.255 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:openvpn]# dhclient carp11 DHCPDISCOVER on carp11 to 255.255.255.255 port 67 interval 2 send_packet: Network is unreachable DHCPDISCOVER on carp11 to 255.255.255.255 port 67 interval 2 send_packet: Network is unreachable DHCPDISCOVER on carp11 to 255.255.255.255 port 67 interval 2 send_packet: Network is unreachable DHCPDISCOVER on carp11 to 255.255.255.255 port 67 interval 2 send_packet: Network is unreachable ^C It appears that dhclient does not like the fact that carp11 is in INIT state. Try a naive work-around and bring carp11 into MASTER state by assigning an fixed alias IP address to it: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:root]# ifconfig carp11 1.2.3.4 netmask 255.255.255.0 up [EMAIL PROTECTED]:root]# ifconfig carp11 carp11: flags=8843UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST mtu 1500 lladdr 00:00:5e:00:01:0b carp: BACKUP carpdev fxp0 vhid 11 advbase 1 advskew 0 groups: carp inet6 fe80::200:5eff:fe00:10b%carp11 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x8 inet 1.2.3.4 netmask 0xff00 broadcast 1.2.3.255 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:root]# dhclient carp11 DHCPDISCOVER on carp11 to 255.255.255.255 port 67 interval 1 DHCPDISCOVER on carp11 to 255.255.255.255 port 67 interval 2 DHCPDISCOVER on carp11 to 255.255.255.255 port 67 interval 5 DHCPDISCOVER on carp11 to 255.255.255.255 port 67 interval 8 DHCPDISCOVER on carp11 to 255.255.255.255 port 67 interval 11 DHCPDISCOVER on carp11 to 255.255.255.255 port 67 interval 16 ^C [EMAIL PROTECTED]:root]# tcpdump -i fxp0 -n port 67 or port 68 tcpdump: listening on fxp0, link-type EN10MB 12:40:57.000270 0.0.0.0.68 255.255.255.255.67: xid:0xf2d76fa5 ether 00:00:5e:00:01:0b [|bootp] [tos 0x10] 12:40:57.031501 10.0.0.2.67 10.0.0.202.68: xid:0xf2d76fa5 Y:10.0.0.202 S:10.0.0.4 ether 00:00:5e:00:01:0b [|bootp] [tos 0x10] 12:40:58.011180 0.0.0.0.68 255.255.255.255.67: xid:0xf2d76fa5 secs:2 ether 00:00:5e:00:01:0b [|bootp] [tos 0x10] 12:40:58.019206 10.0.0.2.67 10.0.0.202.68: xid:0xf2d76fa5 secs:2 Y:10.0.0.202 S:10.0.0.4 ether 00:00:5e:00:01:0b [|bootp] [tos 0x10] 12:41:00.017143 0.0.0.0.68 255.255.255.255.67: xid:0xf2d76fa5 secs:4 ether 00:00:5e:00:01:0b [|bootp] [tos 0x10] 12:41:00.020060 10.0.0.2.67 10.0.0.202.68: xid:0xf2d76fa5 secs:4 Y:10.0.0.202 S:10.0.0.4 ether 00:00:5e:00:01:0b [|bootp] [tos 0x10] 12:41:05.027505 0.0.0.0.68 255.255.255.255.67: xid:0xf2d76fa5 secs:9 ether 00:00:5e:00:01:0b [|bootp] [tos 0x10] 12:41:05.036755 10.0.0.2.67 10.0.0.202.68: xid:0xf2d76fa5 secs:9 Y:10.0.0.202 S:10.0.0.4 ether 00:00:5e:00:01:0b [|bootp] [tos 0x10] 12:41:13.038056 0.0.0.0.68 255.255.255.255.67: xid:0xf2d76fa5 secs:17 ether 00:00:5e:00:01:0b [|bootp] [tos 0x10] 12:41:13.053316 10.0.0.2.67 10.0.0.202.68: xid:0xf2d76fa5 secs:17 Y:10.0.0.202 S:10.0.0.4 ether 00:00:5e:00:01:0b [|bootp] [tos 0x10] 12:41:24.048927 0.0.0.0.68 255.255.255.255.67: xid:0xf2d76fa5 secs:28 ether 00:00:5e:00:01:0b [|bootp] [tos 0x10] 12:41:24.057559 10.0.0.2.67 10.0.0.202.68: xid:0xf2d76fa5 secs:28 Y:10.0.0.202 S:10.0.0.4 ether 00:00:5e:00:01:0b [|bootp] [tos 0x10] ^C 218 packets received by filter 0 packets dropped by kernel The DHCP server (dhcpd) at 10.0.0.2 replies and assigns the dynamic address 10.0.0.202 to the requesting client. However, dhclient on carp11 apparently does never get it. Additional info: - The firewall clusters at work and at home both run i486-current; - The setup works fine if a fixed IP address is staically assigned to the CARP interface; - Searching the archives showed that others also stumbled across this difficulty earlier. http://archives.neohapsis.com/archives/openbsd/2005-11/2665.html - Apparently, one solution was to write some scripts that bring dhclient up and down whenever one of the cluster's external interfaces goes up or down, eventually using ifstated(8). In response to http://undeadly.org/cgi?action=articlesid=20071012140725mode=expanded someone offered his scripts to what seems to
Re: delete deleted data
Are you willing to share the names of those programs ? Kind regards Kasper L wrote: Just FYI about security of deleted data.. I purchase used computers for parts every so often. Many of them have working hard drives in them. For fun, I analyze the hard drive out and see what I can find.. just as a little game of mine. When I run my undelete/recovery tools on them I can see basically everything the previous owner had on the drive.. including passwords. Some of the stuff may be overwritten.. but not much. I don't look at the stuff for malicious use, I just do it out of curiosity to study whether or not formatted drives really are secure. And I can say for sure they are not secure. I don't go in looking at each password I recovered or anything either.. i basically just confirm for fun that I can recover the disk.. it's a cheap thrill and only someone with no life would do such a thing. me. Actually there was a goal in all this.. it was to find the best undelete tool that worked generically in the most situations. And yes I found a few for MS Winblows that worked very well, since most computers I buy had ms windows on them. One thing I found was that some undelete tools are not nearly as good as others. I thought many of them used similar algorithms.. but some of them really worked much better and completely differently L505
Re: sendmail in base not supporting AUTH?
On 2008/01/05 12:00, Daniel wrote: I wish to use sendmail in base to use a SMART_HOST (my isp's smtp server), and that SMART_HOST requires authentication. I was told that sendmail must be compiled with SASL support even if it is only acting as and smtp client when using AUTH. Is it right? Am I stuck here, and won't be able configure sendmail to support AUTH as an smtp client? You can install cyrus-sasl and recompile sendmail from /usr/src with WANT_SMTPAUTH=yes. If you use another MTA for this it makes OS upgrades simpler though - the sasl2 FLAVOR of postfix works nicely for me, here are the main configuration entries to set: /etc/postfix/main.cf - smtp_use_tls = yes smtp_tls_cert_file = /etc/mail/certs/mycert.pem smtp_tls_key_file = /etc/mail/certs/mykey.pem relayhost = [mail.messagingengine.com]:587 smtp_sasl_auth_enable = yes smtp_sasl_password_maps = hash:/etc/postfix/saslpw smtp_sasl_security_options = /etc/postfix/saslpw - [mail.messagingengine.com]:587 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:password and create the TLS certificates as described in starttls(8) (I might have missed something but this should get you most of the way).
Re: Real men don't attack straw men
2008/1/5, Richard Stallman [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Before you argue that ReactOS is merely a free implementation of Win32 API, let me clarify: if the purpose of ReactOS isn't to run some Windows-only software S, then what is the purpose of ReactOS? if S was free, it wouldn't be Windows-only as it would have ported to free OS's. I don't object to implementing free software to support APIs that users use. Yet you object a general purpose, free software that implements a facility that users use? Namely, the port system? I think we are running in circles here... so if you can, please explain: How would the ports system encourage the use of non-free software anymore than ReactOS? You said: There is a lot of non-free software written for the Lose32 API, but Well, like I said in my pass message, the main purpose of ReactOS would be to run software that are only compatible with Win32 (Lose32?) API, simply because they are non-free (and possibly buried with EULA and/or NDA) such that they cannot be ported to a free OS. Whereas ports system on the other hand, is just a general purpose tool and it supports much much more free software than non-free software... if you like to put it this way, there are going to be more users installing non-free software on ReactOS than users installing non-free software on OpenBSD with ports. Don't get me wrong, I love to see a stable version of ReactOS someday, these days I had to run Windows XP in a virtual machine, as a just in case thing for school and work, and I couldn't wait to replace it with ReactOS. So I got to ask this... is it the case that you only care if a url to potentially non-free web-sites are included in such systems? there is also a lot of private (unreleased) software which runs on that API. Thus, its use is not only for running proprietary software. I don't know much about 'private/unreleased software'... but the ports system does support a large number of free software - certainly fits the criteria of its use is not only for running proprietary software. I would ask the developers of platforms that run the Lose32 API to tell the users that running proprietary Windows apps is not freedom. I haven't actually used the port system for non-free software, but if memory serves, the ports system does display a warning/disclaimer/license/EULA if you do try to install non-free stuff. -- Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
Re: FW: Real men don't attack straw men
2008/1/5, Richard Stallman [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I was a bit curious about what would someone who reads web-sites by using a wget daemon through e-mails whose own web-site looks like... well... Apache httpd 2.0.54 ((Debian GNU/Linux) DAV/2 SVN/1.2.0 PHP/4.3.10-22 mod_ssl/2.0.54 OpenSSL/0.9.7e) I use wget for personal reasons. I have nothing against running a web site. I am not playing straw person here, I was just curious. I don't endorse Debian, but I don't object to getting free software from Debian (or from OpenBSD) and installing it. Ok, it is just a bit strange to me that you are getting free software from something you don't endorse when you do endorse something else which you get also that get free software. This continues the pattern of straw men. Over and over, people on this list criticize me for doing something which neither I nor anyone else here actually thinks is wrong. In case you don't know, this _is_ a public mailing list and many people doesn't actually know you in person or even heard of you at all!! So a lot of people can only make criticism based on the words of the messages you said or posted, and straw person could occur naturally. -- Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
Re: delete deleted data
On 04/01/2008, at 8:19 AM, Brad Tilley wrote: One pass from /dev/zero is more than enough for all cases. I agree that after a single pass of zeroes, getting anything but zeroes from a fully working, unaltered drive is not going to happen. But if you remove the digital logic which masks residual signals via thresholds used to determine at what point a 1 is considered a 1 and a 0 a 0, then perhaps 1's and 0's could be restored from some drives. Through the use of a replacement device that samples each bit with a bit depth greater than 1, allowing analysis to interpret what I would have thought would not be constant uniform samples. I think more importantly, if it is comparatively very cheap to erase a drive in a paranoid manner and the leaking of that data could cost a fortune, then the comparatively small cost of paranoid erasure could be a risk worth taking. Shane
Re: [Fwd: Open-Hardware]
2008/1/5, Paul Greidanus [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Richard Stallman wrote: If something is harder to copy, it is ethically ok to have a different standard for this piece of technology. Seriously, that's what you're saying above. Because hardware may have to be copied by hand, you consider them ethically not the same. Yes, that's my position, for 20 years or more. I think that's the right place to make the distinction: between you can copy it yourself and somebody can build more of them. I'm reading this right, the decision as to if something is right and wrong, ethical and non-ethical, is a function of how easy it is? From the looks of it, it is how cheap and easy something can be done. Remember that copying software is not free, even if you don't pay for the software itself. You still need some medium such a CD or hard disk which you have to pay for, and the electricity for doing the actual copying of the bits of data, it is just really cheap to do so. From the look of Stallman's message, it seems as if he thinks copying software is totally free, which in reality it costs a bit more than just plain free. In the case of hardware, it would mean it is too expensive to copy... which it could be... so does that mean freedom to copy something became irrelevant as the cost of copying becomes relatively expensive? -- Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
Re: delete deleted data
On 04/01/2008, at 12:21 PM, Harpalus a Como wrote: Myth? Why are you so upset about this? It's not myth. The techniques involved in recovering data in the manner Marco and the NSA, DoD, and many others describe isn't a matter of running a simple software tool. It's a long, slow, annoying process that is also costly. But it is possible. Not every company or person in the forensics industry is a master at their job. If they say it's not possible, perhaps it's just not something their software package does for them? (I'm not trying to be derogatory, but I do know a guy who does computer forensics work, and the software/hardware he uses is about all he knows. He just goes through the motions. Doesn't know all that much about filesystems or disks.) I agree. Most computer forensics people I have worked with, tended to stick to what they considered to be standard procedures with standard forensics software. They were mostly ex-police with computing training. I personally managed to get results which other forensics teams could not (or would not), which I believe was because I was willing to use some creative techniques that they wouldn't dare come to court with. As far as the data recovery industry goes, I think there are more frauds than experts advertising such services. Shane
Re: Real men don't attack straw men
Thank you for telling me about this problem. I will talk with them about this ASAP. I expect they will probably remove those. And ReactOS is next? Does ReactOS recommend non-free software? If so. please show me what it says, and the URL. I do not have a lot of influence with them, but I could at least remove the link to ReactOS if it comes to that. I am hoping to spend a few hours in a while auditing the other fringe projects that the [Free] Software Foundation recommends. Thank you. I very much appreciate the feedback that this list has provided, showing me things that need to be corrected. Specific problems identified in the free software directory, in BLAG, and in the Ututo web site, have been corrected already.
Re: [Fwd: Open-Hardware]
You certainly don't live by what you preach. You are pointed at not one but various facts to the contrary. I do practice my own principles, but when you compare the two you have to be careful not to alter the principles in your own mind. If you do that, you could easily discover an apparent contradiction which doesn't really come from me. That is what you have done.
Re: Is Visiting the gnewsense website or downloading it actively promoting the use of non-free software?
from the data I get from below http://toolbar.netcraft.com/site_report?url=http://www.gnewsense.org I just wonder if the gnewsense OS is being distributed through the very non free OSes http://www.gnewsense.org/FAQ/FAQ#toc3 The words being distributed through are not entirely clear to me. Does that refer to the following? Perhaps the website is run by gnewsense itself and netcraft wrongly identifies it as Ubuntu. That could be so. Or perhaps their server is running Ubuntu. I think it would be a good idea for the gNewSense server to run gNewSense. However, I don't criticize people for running Ubuntu, just as I don't criticize people for running OpenBSD. You can make an all-free installation if you choose to.
Re: Real men don't attack straw men
I guess I missed the part where you explained how it makes sense to apply a label like not recommended because it supports non-free software to OpenBSD but not to FSF (emacs, etc.). As I've said, I think it's acceptable for free applications to run on non-free platforms (and say that they do), because this doesn't recommend the installation of those non-free platforms. But free systems should not recommend, suggest, or offer to install non-free apps. I follow these principles without discriminating between people or groups. Thus, I think it is legitimate for apps to run on Windows, so I apply this to both GNU applications and OpenBSD-related applications such as OpenSSH. I recognize that this can have the negative effect of reducing the pressure for people to move away from Windows, but I don't think that alone is a reason to reject apps that can run on Windows. Meanwhile, for operating systems, I endorse the ones that don't recommend, suggest, or offer to install non-free apps. I apply this principle to GNU/Linux distros and to BSD distros just the same. When people discover a recommendation for non-free software in a distro which is supposed not to have any, my first response is to show it to the distro developers and ask them to remove it. Everyone makes mistakes, so my aim is to get the mistakes corrected, not jump down their throats.
Re: Richard Stallman...
I note that Richard also says that AROS is a free operating system. I don't recognize the name AROS, but if it is an operating system, it is possible I said something about it at some point. Could you tell me where that statement appears? If I need to correct it, I need to know where it is. Oh really? Did he not notice the web page where AROS includes software which emulates an Amiga perfectly, I doubt I would have looked at the AROS web site myself. To find out the status of the BSD systems, recently, I asked the FSF staff to check for me. And did Richard even check their License page, to notice that it has numerous revocation clauses? I don't know if I ever looked for that page. Perhaps an AROS developer said it was free and I took his word for it. But since you say AROS isn't free, I should check it now. You may be right. What is the URL of that license page?
Re: FW: Real men don't attack straw men
On Jan 5, 2008 11:24 AM, Richard Stallman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This continues the pattern of straw men. Over and over, people on this list criticize me for doing something which neither I nor anyone else here actually thinks is wrong. Please list the names of so called straw men in your opinion and try to find out if thaty have done misleading interviews and has taken a blatantly hippocritic stand for freedom as you have and played dirty politics just for the sake of fame and revenge. If real men should be like you then I don't want to be one!
Re: Real men don't attack straw men
2008/1/6, Richard Stallman [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Thank you for telling me about this problem. I will talk with them about this ASAP. I expect they will probably remove those. And ReactOS is next? Does ReactOS recommend non-free software? If so. please show me what it says, and the URL. I do not have a lot of influence with them, but I could at least remove the link to ReactOS if it comes to that. I don't think OpenBSD users understand what you mean by recommend non-free software, so if you could, please, give an example by showing where OpenBSD (web-site?) says that it recommend non-free software and the URL. -- Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
Re: Richard Stallman...
On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 11:53:30AM +, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote: On Fri, Jan 04, 2008 at 05:49:42PM -0600, Gilles Chehade wrote: Why didn't you answer my mail Rui ? You are a troll. Either I did and you missed it, or it wasn't the answer you'd expect or I found it so irrelevant it didn't even raise any bell. You have not answered at all, you have answered to other people so that you could dodge my embarassing question instead of explaining why it is different to do the exact same thing when you are from the FSF. According to YOU, it is okay to have emacs and gcc run on a proprietary system as it allows more people to run free software. How is it that it is wrong to allow more people to run a free system by giving them links to proprietary software if it encourages them to keep their free system instead of switching to a proprietary one ? By providing emacs and gcc for windows you encourage people to run just a few free applications with proprietary system and (many) tools, while we just give people the freedom to install a proprietary application on top of a free system with free tools. Anyways, most of your emails have been so rude that in afterthought I shouldn't even honour you with a reply. I try hard to keep my emails insult-free, saying that they are rude for helping you avoid embarassing questions is what makes you a troll. Just like your friend Stallman, you play on words and act like a victim if a person points at the flaws in your reasonning, grow up. Gilles -- Gilles Chehade
Re: Richard Stallman...
On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 09:31:10AM -0500, Richard Stallman wrote: I note that Richard also says that AROS is a free operating system. I don't recognize the name AROS, but if it is an operating system, it is possible I said something about it at some point. Could you tell me where that statement appears? If I need to correct it, I need to know where it is. It is amazing how many corrections you've made here and there since the beginning of this thread. It looks more and more like you barely said a thing that you actually checked facts for ... Oh really? Did he not notice the web page where AROS includes software which emulates an Amiga perfectly, I doubt I would have looked at the AROS web site myself. To find out the status of the BSD systems, recently, I asked the FSF staff to check for me. ... And did Richard even check their License page, to notice that it has numerous revocation clauses? I don't know if I ever looked for that page. Perhaps an AROS developer said it was free and I took his word for it. But since you say AROS isn't free, I should check it now. You may be right. ... -- Gilles Chehade
OT YAG Re: delete deleted data
Okay, someone touched on this so I'll follow it a little further. Say you pull the platter(s) out of the drive and now start analysing the data as analog voltage levels and not highs/lows with threshold. Also, get the data off the platter(s) by driving a head across it in different directions. Now start doing signal processing on the data set(s) you've acquired. Any EE worth their weight in salt understands signal processing. I do believe a lot of younger engineers have grown up in the 1 0 digital world and forget about analog. g.day diana
Re: Real men don't attack straw men
On Jan 5, 2008, at 9:30 AM, Richard Stallman wrote: As I've said, I think it's acceptable for free applications to run on non-free platforms (and say that they do), because this doesn't recommend the installation of those non-free platforms. Yes, it does. It's even WORSE since these projects spent countless hours modifying their code to support those non-free systems. Hypocrite! --- Jason Dixon DixonGroup Consulting http://www.dixongroup.net
Re: Real men don't attack straw men
On Jan 5, 2008 8:19 PM, Sunnz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 2008/1/6, Richard Stallman [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Thank you for telling me about this problem. I will talk with them about this ASAP. I expect they will probably remove those. And ReactOS is next? Does ReactOS recommend non-free software? If so. please show me what it says, and the URL. I do not have a lot of influence with them, but I could at least remove the link to ReactOS if it comes to that. I don't think OpenBSD users understand what you mean by recommend non-free software, so if you could, please, give an example by showing where OpenBSD (web-site?) says that it recommend non-free software and the URL. Pardon me for intervening: http://www.openbsd.org/faq/faq13.html#javaflash tells the user how to get these things into a clean OpenBSD system. I am sure that it doesn't include the words: Zomg! you have to use it and we highly recommend it but _every_ OpenBSD user is encouraged to read the FAQ and as a consequence ends up reading these sessions. Maybe they should come with the kind of dubious warning signs we get on cigarette packs: Use of non-free software is highly harmful to your computer and ethics. On a more serious note: everybody who criticizes the other of non-free software must come clean first: No clean, no talk. -- Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 -- Karthik http://guilt.bafsoft.net
Re: Richard Stallman...
2008/1/6, Richard Stallman [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I note that Richard also says that AROS is a free operating system. I don't recognize the name AROS, but if it is an operating system, it is possible I said something about it at some point. Could you tell me where that statement appears? If I need to correct it, I need to know where it is. Dude... it is on the endorsement list on gnu.org you talked about in the beginning how you cannot include OpenBSD in it... http://gnu.org/links/links.html Is that not the list you talked about? I have a feeling that list is maintained by your 'FSF staff' and you don't have much of an idea of what's included in it? -- Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
Re: Real men don't attack straw men
On Jan 5, 2008 11:30 AM, Richard Stallman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As I've said, I think it's acceptable for free applications to run on non-free platforms (and say that they do), because this doesn't recommend the installation of those non-free platforms. But free systems should not recommend, suggest, or offer to install non-free apps. ReactOS is a free software operative system with a support database that indicates which programs it can run. It can lists those programs in different ways, including, by vendor. Here is Adobe: http://www.reactos.org/support/index.php/comp/vendor/id/4/ And here is Microsoft: http://www.reactos.org/support/index.php/comp/vendor/id/2/ If I understand you weird meaninig of promotion, then you'll find this a bad thing too, right? Greetings.
Re: Real men don't attack straw men
On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 09:30:09AM -0500, Richard Stallman wrote: I guess I missed the part where you explained how it makes sense to apply a label like not recommended because it supports non-free software to OpenBSD but not to FSF (emacs, etc.). As I've said, I think it's acceptable for free applications to run on non-free platforms (and say that they do), because this doesn't recommend the installation of those non-free platforms. But free systems should not recommend, suggest, or offer to install non-free apps. I hope you do realize how much this reminds us of _1984_ ? Not talking about something is a bit like sticking your head in the sand. It's really not a healthy attitude. As far as free software goes, it's a bit like developping everything in your own corner, completely ignoring whatever goes on in the commercial corner of the world... or not acknowledging its influences. I'm sorry, but not talking about something that exists won't make it go away.
Re: Open Source Article Spawns Interesting Ethical Question
On Jan 4, 2008 11:41 PM, Paul de Weerd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] I've been working in IT for well over 10 years now. I can promise you that, had I denounced non-free software, I would not have been able to pay for my food or my rent/mortgage for the past 10 years. http://technews.acm.org/archives.cfm?fo=2007-04-apr/apr-09-2007.html#306282 --- Cell phones also came under attack, for their ability to be used as a tracking device, even when it is turned off. In summing up a broader philosophy, Stallman suggested, Don't buy a house, a car, or have children. The problem is they're expensive and you have to spend all your time making money to pay for them. --- http://ia310134.us.archive.org/1/items/The_Basement_Interviews/Richard_Stallman_Interview.pdf --- RP: So how do you fund yourself today? RS: I get paid for some of my speeches. In addition, when I am travelling in a lot of places people don't let me pay for anything, so life is cheaper. This is sort of amusing and makes me a little bit like a medieval king. Medieval kings had to keep travelling all the time because if they stayed in one place they would burden the people there so much that the people would eventually get mad! RP: Is that an adequate way of funding yourself? RS: Loads of people invite me to visit them, and if I am there for a few days they are happy to do things like pay for my food, and they pay for me to go there, because otherwise I would go somewhere else instead. And some of them also pay a fee. --- regards, alexander.
Re: Richard Stallman...
On Jan 5, 2008 11:31 AM, Richard Stallman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't recognize the name AROS, but if it is an operating system, it is possible I said something about it at some point. Could you tell me where that statement appears? If I need to correct it, I need to know where it is. http://www.gnu.org/links/links.html Go to Other free operating systems section. What is the URL of that license page? http://aros.sourceforge.net/license.html Greetings.
Re: Real men don't attack straw men
On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 08:51:33PM +0530, Karthik Kumar wrote: On Jan 5, 2008 8:19 PM, Sunnz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 2008/1/6, Richard Stallman [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Thank you for telling me about this problem. I will talk with them about this ASAP. I expect they will probably remove those. And ReactOS is next? Does ReactOS recommend non-free software? If so. please show me what it says, and the URL. I do not have a lot of influence with them, but I could at least remove the link to ReactOS if it comes to that. I don't think OpenBSD users understand what you mean by recommend non-free software, so if you could, please, give an example by showing where OpenBSD (web-site?) says that it recommend non-free software and the URL. Pardon me for intervening: http://www.openbsd.org/faq/faq13.html#javaflash tells the user how to get these things into a clean OpenBSD system. I am sure that it doesn't include the words: Zomg! you have to use it and we highly recommend it but _every_ OpenBSD user is encouraged to read the FAQ and as a consequence ends up reading these sessions. Maybe they should come with the kind of dubious warning signs we get on cigarette packs: Use of non-free software is highly harmful to your computer and ethics. On another hand we are not GNU/GPL and we don't mind our users installing non free software if it is what they want. The FAQ is where this needs to be documented for users to get their job done faster. On a more serious note: everybody who criticizes the other of non-free software must come clean first: No clean, no talk. one who criticizes the other should come informed too. -- Gilles Chehade
Re: Advice requested on security issues
On 05/01/2008, Nick Holland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip Your PF rules would probably just block all incoming traffic and pass outgoing traffic. Or if you want to make sure it is used only for your desired app, block everything outbound 'cept for that traffic destined to your desired locations (note: this is a lot of fun to maintain). Yes I may consider only enabling the outbound locations, but probably will just block unsolicited incoming traffic. I once asked a bank for the list of urls they would use so I could whitelist them, but they said they couldn't give that to me. Strange how they claim to be concerned about security.. In order for your general purpose machine to impact your OpenBSD machine you would need to be running some app on the OpenBSD machine that is vulnerable to attack. So, in general, just don't add anything to the machine you don't need, and in your case, default install is about right. Thanks, this is what I thought. 2: Space for the P3 is limited and I would like to remove its printer and print bank statements across the LAN on the main PC (running Linux, or maybe FreeBSD in future) using CUPS. Does this introduce security risks? Some. Not much. If you end up (accidentally) running a poorly written service on your OpenBSD machine, yes you could be attacked. Even if you are initiating contact with a compromised machine, it *might* be able to send something back at you that could choke your app and cause Bad Things to happen. Choking the app is not so bad. Stealing passwords is the concern. I presume as password transmission is encrypted they can't be sniffed from somewhere else on the the LAN, so I guess it's down to whether CUPS (or some other app inside the PC) could be hacked somehow? I suspect this is such a remote possibility that I should stop worrying about it. The sad thing is you are being more careful with your system design than your bank probably is. :-/ By the time you are running OpenBSD on your banking computer, I suspect you have shifted the primary risk to the other end of the wire...your bank is a bigger risk to your data than you are. Agreed On 05/01/2008, Ted Unangst [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: you may or may not find this helpful. you should consider how much money you have, how many other people have that much or more money, how many of those people only use a windows pc to do their banking, and how many would-be thieves capable of infecting all those windows machines would decide to spend the extra effort figuring out your installation in order to exploit it instead of settling for only all the money of all the windows users. i actually have a similar setup, but have no concerns about the windows machine attacking the openbsd machines. Yes I understand I'm being more cautious than 99% of the population, but as I'm retired there isn't a whole lot of money coming in to replace lost savings. Internet savings accounts pay enough over accounts available on the high street to make the effort worthwhile, and why should I take a risk if it's avoidable with a little good organisation? you may or may not find this helpful - I am grateful for your comments and those from others, thanks.
Re: Open Source Article Spawns Interesting Ethical Question
In response to off-band inquiries... On Jan 5, 2008 4:41 PM, Alexander Terekhov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Jan 4, 2008 11:41 PM, Paul de Weerd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] I've been working in IT for well over 10 years now. I can promise you that, had I denounced non-free software, I would not have been able to pay for my food or my rent/mortgage for the past 10 years. http://technews.acm.org/archives.cfm?fo=2007-04-apr/apr-09-2007.html#306282 --- Cell phones also came under attack, for their ability to be used as a tracking device, even when it is turned off. In summing up a broader philosophy, Stallman suggested, Don't buy a house, a car, or have children. The problem is they're expensive and you have to spend all your time making money to pay for them. --- Original linuxinsider.com article seems to be gone but full copy is still available courtesy of chineselinuxuniversity.net. (I'm quoting it in full below for the sake of convenience to RMS -- all those remote wget burdens, y'know.) http://www.chineselinuxuniversity.net/news/3308.shtml --- ;6S-Dz=xHkVP9zLinux4sQ', D?G0NRCG5DW\W2aSC;'J} 6227, W\5c;wJ} 7840636 Google6(VFKQKw: 2008Dj1TB5HU PGFZAy UPF8PEO Linux4sQ' | PBNE | JuNDUB | 5gWSJiSkHm~ | WJT4U5c | V\1(:MTSV | DZ:K296! | HK2EVPPD | WTSIJ1?U Free Software Foundation's Richard Stallman: 'Live Cheaply' U*WT: linuxinsider.com 1;TD6A4NJ}: 68 SI yangyi SZ 2007-04-05 14:04:18 La9) Speaking at Lehigh University last week, Free Software Foundation Founder Richard Stallman urged his audience to make open source not just a way of computing, but a way of life. Using commercial proprietary software leaves users divided because we can't make copies to help our neighbors and helpless because we can't see the source code, Stallman said. Free WiFi Hotspot Locator from TechNewsWorld Wondering where to find the nearest publicly available WiFi Internet access? Our global directory of more than 100,000 locations in 26 countries is a terrific tool for mobile computer users. Richard Stallman doesn't own an MP3 player. He doesn't own a mobile telephone. In fact, this techno-visionary -- a founder of the Free Software Foundation -- doesn't use any of the usual computer programs many people use. He spent the better part of two hours last week, before a mostly supportive audience at Lehigh University in Bethlehem, Pa., explaining exactly why he has made these choices, which he couched not in technical but in ethical terms, and why his foundation works to promote what's called free software -- software that can be legally copied, altered and exchanged. With his long, slightly unkempt, dark, shoulder-length hair and his rumpled demeanor, Stallman, 53, looked more a 1960s rock guitarist than a software guru. His minimalist attire, a creased, logo-free red knit shirt, khaki pants and stocking feet, emphasized the counterculture associations. He parked his shoes, side-by-side, next to the podium in Lehigh's Whitaker auditorium, where he addressed about 150 in a voice tinged with a slight New England accent. Free Software, Free Markets As the afternoon unfolded, the counterculture connections seemed more than appropriate as he spoke of his role in creating an alternative to a computing environment dominated by corporations and their operating systems and software, loaded with hidden features and restrictive limitations. However, there were other times when Stallman's words seemed to conflict with his image. He spoke approvingly about the merits of people making money on their efforts and suggested free software encouraged more of a free market than the restrictive aspects of the proprietary software world. Stallman is also one of the creators of the GNU/Linux operating system Forge ahead and stay on budget with simple to install HP server technology., which runs most computers and Internet servers not run by commercial giants Microsoft (Nasdaq: MSFT) Free 30-Day Trial. Seamlessly Integrate UNIX Linux systems with Active Directory. Latest News about Microsoft Windows and Apple (Nasdaq: AAPL) Latest News about Apple Macintosh Latest News about Macintosh. People choose computer software for reasons that have to do with convenience, reliability, ease of use and cost, he says, but he called those choices a fundamental mistake because they don't allow us to see what is important. The source code for such programs should be easily visible to all users so they can change, adjust or improve upon programs or operating systems they create, he says. With proprietary software, the guts of the programs are a well-guarded secret, and such tinkering is illegal. A Call for Change Using commercial proprietary software leaves users divided because we can't make copies to help our neighbors and helpless because we can't see the source code, Stallman says. Stallman urged his audience, mostly Lehigh
Re: Real men don't attack straw men
On another hand we are not GNU/GPL and we don't mind our users installing non free software if it is what they want. The FAQ is where this needs to be documented for users to get their job done faster. If you don't mind users using non-free software, you shouldn't be putting the 'Free. ' in 'Free. Functional. Secure.'; You shouldn't be fighting those blob vendors and call them nasty names; Rather, probably document how to use such drivers and firmware 'faster'. Then you shouldn't be making a claim that 'OpenBSD supports openness'. If you can manipulate your reasons for making this ethical, you shouldn't be calling others names. And you shouldn't bring back ethics' dead body around your neck. On a more serious note: everybody who criticizes the other of non-free software must come clean first: No clean, no talk. one who criticizes the other should come informed too. And the rest who do should avoid red herring arguments and accept what they are doing. In other words, they should say: 'I am wrong. I will fix the problem at my end. Your turn now.' I don't see anybody doing it. Don't you see how you're not doing anything but complaining? It doesn't make this any different. -- Gilles Chehade -- Karthik http://guilt.bafsoft.net
Re: [Fwd: Open-Hardware]
On 1/5/08 3:31 PM, Richard Stallman wrote: You certainly don't live by what you preach. You are pointed at not one but various facts to the contrary. I do practice my own principles, By using and endorsing gNewSense??? It seems you really don't read what's going on there, people working on it more or less scream out it's an impossible mission the way it's setup now and the project goals are not met for the foreseeable future. As long as gNewSense is not clean, you should not use it and point at =real= alternatives. For example the OpenBSD distribution. You can simply warn your believers that they should never install something other that from the 3 distribution CDs and you would practice your own principles. You are warned for free so many times for so many facts on this list about why you don't practice your own principles that we can do nothing else than conclude you are a liar. Unnecessary and thus pathetic! +++chefren
Re: Real men don't attack straw men
On Jan 5, 2008 8:51 PM, Karthik Kumar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Pardon me for intervening: Its alright :-) http://www.openbsd.org/faq/faq13.html#javaflash tells the user how to get these things into a clean OpenBSD system. I am sure that it doesn't include the words: Zomg! you have to use it and we highly recommend it but _every_ OpenBSD user is encouraged to read the FAQ and as a consequence ends up reading these sessions. Maybe they should come with the kind of dubious warning signs we get on cigarette packs: Use of non-free software is highly harmful to your computer and ethics. Please Ask RMS to put it in the softwares on the FSF software list. He is the one who started it all!! Its bad you didn't cc him. On a more serious note: everybody who criticizes the other of non-free software must come clean first: No clean, no talk. Again this is typically what you must have said to RMS and not to misc@
Re: Advice requested on security issues
On Fri, Jan 04, 2008 at 11:28:18PM -0500, Nick Holland wrote: Rusty Gadd wrote: I am seeking advice on the security aspects of the configuration of my home system. I have 2 PC's, connected to the internet via a firewalled NAT router. The main PC is an i386 P4 used for general computing, the second is an older i386 P3 which I intend to dedicate to internet banking for maximum security. I have installed OpenBSD on the P3 with just the xfce4 window manager and the Mozilla Firefox browser. Both PC's have separate printers. 2: Space for the P3 is limited and I would like to remove its printer and print bank statements across the LAN on the main PC (running Linux, or maybe FreeBSD in future) using CUPS. Does this introduce security risks? Why would you need CUPS on the P3? Shouldn't the bsd lpd be able to send the bank statement over to the other box to then get formatted and printed? lpd is in base already. Some. Not much. If you end up (accidentally) running a poorly written service on your OpenBSD machine, yes you could be attacked. Even if you are initiating contact with a compromised machine, it *might* be able to send something back at you that could choke your app and cause Bad Things to happen. The sad thing is you are being more careful with your system design than your bank probably is. :-/ By the time you are running OpenBSD on your banking computer, I suspect you have shifted the primary risk to the other end of the wire...your bank is a bigger risk to your data than you are. Does running Firefox on the banking computer, even if it is running on OpenBSD, cause any concerns? Is there a more secure browser that will still work with the bank's system? I'm assuming that the base Lynx won't work (if it will, just use that). Will you sit down at a separate screen/keyboard on the OpenBSD banking computer or will you access it via ssh? Would forwarding X via ssh from the banking machine to your main machine make banking any less secure? I suppose if the main machine were infected it could read your keystrokes as you type in passwords. Perhaps you could use the banking machine as your main access point, running apps on the main box via ssh. Would that introduce any insecurity in the banking machine? Doug.
Re: Real men don't attack straw men
As I've said, I think it's acceptable for free applications to run on non-free platforms (and say that they do), because this doesn't recommend the installation of those non-free platforms. But free systems should not recommend, suggest, or offer to install non-free apps. What is an operating system? An OS could be considered an application, Thus it's very convent that you can recommend free software on non-free operating systems, but then attack free operating systems that only offer an optional scaffold for using non-free software. Richard, You're a hypocrite.. and your values are flawed.. I think you need to re-evaluate your position, and for goodness sake.. use a web browser so you can actually backup your claims. (With research..) Please, Go back to HURD land.. stop biting the hand that feeds the community, by writing drivers.. obtaining vendor docs.. and protesting binary blobs - And stop making uneducated accusations and assessments based on what some friend's friend's brothers mother told you in passing. -Nix Fan.
Re: Real men don't attack straw men
On Jan 5, 2008 9:58 PM, Karthik Kumar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On another hand we are not GNU/GPL and we don't mind our users installing non free software if it is what they want. The FAQ is where this needs to be documented for users to get their job done faster. If you don't mind users using non-free software, you shouldn't be putting the 'Free. ' in 'Free. Functional. Secure.'; You shouldn't be fighting those blob vendors and call them nasty names; Rather, probably document how to use such drivers and firmware 'faster'. Then you shouldn't be making a claim that 'OpenBSD supports openness'. If you can manipulate your reasons for making this ethical, you shouldn't be calling others names. And you shouldn't bring back ethics' dead body around your neck. again this is good advice RMS should hear so i am ccing to him :-) especially the phrase manipulate your reasons for making this ethical one who criticizes the other should come informed too. EXACTLY WHAT RMS DID NOT DO!!! Boy you should be sending this to RMS instead. You talk a little sense in some of the phrases in your replies. But you are talking to the wrong people. So please Cc RMS. And the rest who do should avoid red herring arguments and accept what they are doing. In other words, they should say: 'I am wrong. I will fix the problem at my end. Your turn now.' I don't see anybody doing it. Don't you see how you're not doing anything but complaining? It doesn't make this any different. Again this is for RMS. He does not fix the problem at his end. those are 1) Apologize for slandering other projects who don't come under his control. 2) Do Research to find out the truth 3) Be practical ( Demon+wget ) And all he does is is complain. 1) I made a minor mistake. 2) Everything He says is OK. 3) rolling in the mud after falling down without trying to get up and be clean. 4) Lament how Linux devs don't listen to him. and more...
Re: Richard Stallman...
On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 08:47:16AM -0600, Gilles Chehade wrote: On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 11:53:30AM +, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote: On Fri, Jan 04, 2008 at 05:49:42PM -0600, Gilles Chehade wrote: Why didn't you answer my mail Rui ? You are a troll. Either I did and you missed it, or it wasn't the answer you'd expect or I found it so irrelevant it didn't even raise any bell. You have not answered at all, you have answered to other people so that you could dodge my embarassing question instead of explaining why it is different to do the exact same thing when you are from the FSF. I'm not from the FSF. According to YOU, it is okay to have emacs and gcc run on a proprietary system as it allows more people to run free software. How is it that it is wrong to allow more people to run a free system by giving them links to proprietary software if it encourages them to keep their free system instead of switching to a proprietary one ? 1) ftp://ftp.openbsd.org/ isn't links 2) using more free software is better than not running it at all 3) incentivating usage of non-free software on free software operating systems doesn't incentivate the creation of free software replacements 4) FYI I think the wine project is counter-productive as it enables running non-free software on free software operating systems, and as such de-incentivates the creation of replacements. 4.1) but it's free software and its authors have their own independence. By providing emacs and gcc for windows you encourage people to run just a few free applications with proprietary system and (many) tools, while we just give people the freedom to install a proprietary application on top of a free system with free tools. Look, OpenBSD is aggressive enough that people who need such non-free software likely won't even run it on OpenBSD, so what you're saying is that to the convenience of a few people who don't care for freedom of all users, you distribute non-free software. Anyways, most of your emails have been so rude that in afterthought I shouldn't even honour you with a reply. I try hard to keep my emails insult-free, saying that they are rude for helping you avoid embarassing questions is what makes you a troll. Just like your friend Stallman, you play on words and act like a victim if a person points at the flaws in your reasonning, grow up. No, I am a victim and your (generically, not specifically you) attitude actually makes my relation with OpenBSD very frustrating. Rui -- Wibble. Today is Setting Orange, the 5th day of Chaos in the YOLD 3174 Celebrate Mungday + No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown + Whatever you do will be insignificant, | but it is very important that you do it -- Gandhi + So let's do it...?
Re: Real men don't attack straw men
On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 09:58:47PM +0530, Karthik Kumar wrote: On another hand we are not GNU/GPL and we don't mind our users installing non free software if it is what they want. The FAQ is where this needs to be documented for users to get their job done faster. If you don't mind users using non-free software, you shouldn't be putting the 'Free. ' in 'Free. Functional. Secure.' The word 'free' is there because OpenBSD is free. It is not there because developers mind or don't mind users doing this or that. ; You shouldn't be fighting those blob vendors and call them nasty names; Rather, probably document how to use such drivers and firmware 'faster'. Should you wish to inform yourself, there are a number of posts in the list archives explaining various specific reasons why the OpenBSD developers are against blobs. Theo, in particular, wrote at least one rather short and very cogent message explaining the reasons. You should look towards the beginning of the threads, because later on you are more likely to see Theo losing patience with respondents who did not read the original posts (carefully enough, or perhaps not at all).
Re: Real men don't attack straw men
Again this is for RMS. He does not fix the problem at his end. those are 1) Apologize for slandering other projects who don't come under his control. 2) Do Research to find out the truth 3) Be practical ( Demon+wget ) And all he does is is complain. 1) I made a minor mistake. 2) Everything He says is OK. 3) rolling in the mud after falling down without trying to get up and be clean. 4) Lament how Linux devs don't listen to him. and more... When I said everybody, I meant Everybody. Not one person. Applying the same to OpenBSD, all that the people here do is bitch about and nothing more.
Re: [Fwd: Open-Hardware]
On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 12:54:05AM -0500, Richard Stallman wrote: But I think the FPGAs in products are more like the possible computer in my microwave oven: nobody installs software in them, so they might as well be circuits. Really? All those wifi/raid/cpu/etc cards/chips out there that need firmware, you think they're not a mix of both microcontroller code and other binary bits that configure an ASIC or FPGA? I am not a hardware expert; I don't know sort of hardware the firmware blobs run on. I will presume you're right. He is right. Hardware these days basically runs code. You take several cores and put together an ASIC that does specialized work. For example I know of an iSCSI vendor that took a processing core, an I2C core, a UART core, a PCI bridge core (and some other minor ones) and made a nice ASIC that runs iSCSI in hardware. They even took a well known BSD TCP/IP stack and converted it to pure hardware (thats code - hardware). Now if you have more than 1024 connections on that iSCSI core (which incidentally also works a TCP Offload Engine aka TOE) then the connections get offloaded to HBA/NIC code. Now what was a pure hardware device changes into a pure software device. This is just one example and there are many more beautifully blurred examples. Your argument is a fallacy with modern hardware. Whether it runs on a computer or an FPGA, either way it's a program. So the next crucial question is, do users normally install programs on that device? For some devices, the answer is no. However, if the firmware is stored in a file on the disk, and the system downloads it into the device, the answer to that question is yes. I am sure that at MIT they taught you that a finite sate machine can be moved from hardware to software and vice versa. All new hardware whether it is a specialized ASIC or a general purpose cpu is deigned and run in software first. This is therefore obviously a pure software function. The reason why it is then later moved to silicon is for speed and marketing purposes (yes, you know making money with development). So you say that developing hardware is unethical until you have the physical hardware? And the reason is that software is cheap and hardware isn't? I get paid the same whether I am writing code or doing hardware (I do both for a living). So the company that I work for values the code that I write roughly the same as the hardware that I make. Doesn't this therefore value hardware roughly the same as software from a development cost perspective? Also modern CPUs run microcode. Does this make them unethical? I am sorry but I am completely lost as to what your philosophy is. Could you please do me (and presumably this list) a big favor and explain what ethics mean to you. I really would like to understand how writing software for a living measures up with lets say war or rape. I also would like to understand a little bit better why hardware is exempt from being unethical (make sure you explain ethics first so that I can truly understand this). Could you please respond to all paragraphs that I wrote? I really want to understand your thinking here.
Re: Real men don't attack straw men
On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 09:58:47PM +0530, Karthik Kumar wrote: On another hand we are not GNU/GPL and we don't mind our users installing non free software if it is what they want. The FAQ is where this needs to be documented for users to get their job done faster. If you don't mind users using non-free software, you shouldn't be putting the 'Free. ' in 'Free. Functional. Secure.'; You shouldn't be fighting those blob vendors and call them nasty names; Rather, probably document how to use such drivers and firmware 'faster'. Then you shouldn't be making a claim that 'OpenBSD supports openness'. If you can manipulate your reasons for making this ethical, you shouldn't be calling others names. And you shouldn't bring back ethics' dead body around your neck. You are talking about unrelated matters, and mixing our goals with the ones of your own community. OpenBSD is free software that contains no blob, no closed-source object and that can be *fully* redistributed with no strings attached. You can buy the cd and do whatever you want as long as you retain the copyright on the files in it. You can take any part of OpenBSD and look at source for it, nothing is obfuscated. You can build a full OpenBSD system from the sources on the cvs. That's it. What you do with it is not of our matter and we do not prevent you from installing a proprietary software on top of it. This is your call, what you do with what we provide you is none of our business, as long as you do not remove the copyright notice. On a more serious note: everybody who criticizes the other of non-free software must come clean first: No clean, no talk. one who criticizes the other should come informed too. And the rest who do should avoid red herring arguments and accept what they are doing. In other words, they should say: 'I am wrong. I will fix the problem at my end. Your turn now.' I don't see anybody doing it. Don't you see how you're not doing anything but complaining? It doesn't make this any different. Please, show us what it is that we do and that goes against our goals and license. Hint: carefully read the two following pages. http://www.openbsd.org/goals.html http://www.openbsd.org/policy.html -- Gilles Chehade
Re: Richard Stallman...
On Jan 5, 2008, at 6:31 AM, Richard Stallman wrote: I doubt I would have looked at the AROS web site myself. To find out the status of the BSD systems, recently, I asked the FSF staff to check for me. Wait, you have someone else do the research, and this persons opinions get reflected in what you say? You don't have someone else factcheck, or double check these facts yourself?
Re: Real men don't attack straw men
On Jan 5, 2008 11:20 PM, William Boshuck [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 09:58:47PM +0530, Karthik Kumar wrote: On another hand we are not GNU/GPL and we don't mind our users installing non free software if it is what they want. The FAQ is where this needs to be documented for users to get their job done faster. If you don't mind users using non-free software, you shouldn't be putting the 'Free. ' in 'Free. Functional. Secure.' The word 'free' is there because OpenBSD is free. It is not there because developers mind or don't mind users doing this or that. You're missing the point why somebody is calling OpenBSD non-free. Or supposedly why emacs runs on non-free. ; You shouldn't be fighting those blob vendors and call them nasty names; Rather, probably document how to use such drivers and firmware 'faster'. Should you wish to inform yourself, there are a number of posts in the list archives explaining various specific reasons why the OpenBSD developers are against blobs. Theo, in particular, wrote at least one rather short and very cogent message explaining the reasons. You should look towards the beginning of the threads, because later on you are more likely to see Theo losing patience with respondents who did not read the original posts (carefully enough, or perhaps not at all). Here is one: http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions/2005-March/081313.html Notice how Theo talks about because their firmware images were not free enough to ship in our releases I suppose you can now explain the meaning of the term free in firmware in this context? Don't assume people don't read before replying in here. -- Karthik http://guilt.bafsoft.net
Re: Real men don't attack straw men
On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 11:28:24PM +0530, Karthik Kumar wrote: You are talking about unrelated matters, and mixing our goals with the ones of your own community. I represent neither FSF nor OpenBSD. I probably represent the community which listens to the propagandas put across by both but wants to fight back against false marketing and for the right things TM. Then you are misunderstanding OpenBSD's goals which are clearly stated at the link I provided you and that you obviously failed to read. OpenBSD is free software that contains no blob, no closed-source object and that can be *fully* redistributed with no strings attached. You can buy the cd and do whatever you want as long as you retain the copyright on the files in it. You can take any part of OpenBSD and look at source for it, nothing is obfuscated. You can build a full OpenBSD system from the sources on the cvs. That's it. Yawn. And it makes the flash installation faster after you've built it from the CVS. We do not provide flash, we provide a Makefile which will allow someone to install flash if he wants to. This Makefile is not even part of the system and needs to be fetched manually by the user. This is *NOT* against goals, which you do not want to read. Please stop making uninformed claims, read the goals and policy page which are accessible from the very home page of the project. When you do so, you can freely point us where we are in breach with our claims, until then you are just trolling. What you do with it is not of our matter and we do not prevent you from installing a proprietary software on top of it. This is your call, what you do with what we provide you is none of our business, as long as you do not remove the copyright notice. My call: all lies and ego. You failed to read two pages and to point out where we are going against our own claims. My call: troll. -- Gilles Chehade
Re: Real men don't attack straw men
Then you are misunderstanding OpenBSD's goals which are clearly stated at the link I provided you and that you obviously failed to read. I understand the goals that are not written on that page: do what you like and fight for what you believe in. Goals are just text written in a stupid web page until you live up to them. OpenBSD is free software that contains no blob, no closed-source object and that can be *fully* redistributed with no strings attached. You can buy the cd and do whatever you want as long as you retain the copyright on the files in it. You can take any part of OpenBSD and look at source for it, nothing is obfuscated. You can build a full OpenBSD system from the sources on the cvs. That's it. Yawn. And it makes the flash installation faster after you've built it from the CVS. We do not provide flash, we provide a Makefile which will allow someone to install flash if he wants to. This Makefile is not even part of the system and needs to be fetched manually by the user. This is *NOT* against goals, which you do not want to read. I use ports. I am not dumb. :P The goals do not specify to encourage people to use non-free software, but I see that happening anyway. Please stop making uninformed claims, read the goals and policy page which are accessible from the very home page of the project. I am not uninformed. What makes you say that? You, sir are biased towards OpenBSD and you can say what you want but it doesn't make your version of the truth any better. You failed to read two pages and to point out where we are going against our own claims. My call: troll. Your own claims? 1. (Try to be the #1 most secure operating system). Google for adobe flash player vulnerabilities. 2. Do not let serious problems sit unsolved. I see that you people only fight about it and pretend it has never been a problem. -- Gilles Chehade -- Karthik http://guilt.bafsoft.net
Re: delete deleted data
It was shareware/trialware and I am looking for the name of it... usually it is right on my Wiki when I make notes.. but I can't find it there yet. L505 Kasper Revsbech wrote: Are you willing to share the names of those programs ? Kind regards Kasper L wrote: One thing I found was that some undelete tools are not nearly as good as others. I thought many of them used similar algorithms.. but some of them really worked much better and completely differently L505
Re: Richard Stallman...
That's clearly a rhetorical question. On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 07:30:36AM -0800, johan beisser wrote: On Jan 5, 2008, at 6:31 AM, Richard Stallman wrote: I doubt I would have looked at the AROS web site myself. To find out the status of the BSD systems, recently, I asked the FSF staff to check for me. Wait, you have someone else do the research, and this persons opinions get reflected in what you say? You don't have someone else factcheck, or double check these facts yourself?
Re: OT YAG Re: delete deleted data
On 06/01/2008, at 1:57 AM, Diana Eichert wrote: Any EE worth their weight in salt understands signal processing. I do believe a lot of younger engineers have grown up in the 1 0 digital world and forget about analog. I think the first computers I witnessed in a work place, were actually analog computers (Navy). Where a mix of humans, transistors, valves, gears and three-phase motors/sensors, got the job done.;-) Shane
Re: Real men don't attack straw men
On Jan 5, 2008 10:56 PM, Gilles Chehade [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 09:58:47PM +0530, Karthik Kumar wrote: On another hand we are not GNU/GPL and we don't mind our users installing non free software if it is what they want. The FAQ is where this needs to be documented for users to get their job done faster. If you don't mind users using non-free software, you shouldn't be putting the 'Free. ' in 'Free. Functional. Secure.'; You shouldn't be fighting those blob vendors and call them nasty names; Rather, probably document how to use such drivers and firmware 'faster'. Then you shouldn't be making a claim that 'OpenBSD supports openness'. If you can manipulate your reasons for making this ethical, you shouldn't be calling others names. And you shouldn't bring back ethics' dead body around your neck. You are talking about unrelated matters, and mixing our goals with the ones of your own community. I represent neither FSF nor OpenBSD. I probably represent the community which listens to the propagandas put across by both but wants to fight back against false marketing and for the right things TM. OpenBSD is free software that contains no blob, no closed-source object and that can be *fully* redistributed with no strings attached. You can buy the cd and do whatever you want as long as you retain the copyright on the files in it. You can take any part of OpenBSD and look at source for it, nothing is obfuscated. You can build a full OpenBSD system from the sources on the cvs. That's it. Yawn. And it makes the flash installation faster after you've built it from the CVS. What you do with it is not of our matter and we do not prevent you from installing a proprietary software on top of it. This is your call, what you do with what we provide you is none of our business, as long as you do not remove the copyright notice. My call: all lies and ego. -- Karthik http://guilt.bafsoft.net
Re: Richard Stallman...
Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote: On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 08:47:16AM -0600, Gilles Chehade wrote: On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 11:53:30AM +, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote: On Fri, Jan 04, 2008 at 05:49:42PM -0600, Gilles Chehade wrote: Why didn't you answer my mail Rui ? You are a troll. Either I did and you missed it, or it wasn't the answer you'd expect or I found it so irrelevant it didn't even raise any bell. You have not answered at all, you have answered to other people so that you could dodge my embarassing question instead of explaining why it is different to do the exact same thing when you are from the FSF. I'm not from the FSF. According to YOU, it is okay to have emacs and gcc run on a proprietary system as it allows more people to run free software. How is it that it is wrong to allow more people to run a free system by giving them links to proprietary software if it encourages them to keep their free system instead of switching to a proprietary one ? 1) ftp://ftp.openbsd.org/ isn't links 2) using more free software is better than not running it at all Using openbsd is using free software.. using MORE free software than Windows Server 2003. Using default openbsd and having an option to run Google search or ports is the same as using GCC and Emacs on windows with having the option to migrate to gnu/linux.. since ea lot of GCC users have never used linux/gnu ever. Same Thing. Hypocrite thoughts are constructed in your mind the way you want to see it.. the same way CULTS want you to see that their cult is right about EVERYTHING and every other religion and church is wrong.
Re: Real men don't attack straw men
On Jan 5, 2008 11:24 PM, Karthik Kumar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: When I said everybody, I meant Everybody. Not one person. Applying the same to OpenBSD, all that the people here do is bitch about and nothing more. NO! people here are not bitching, May be you are. People here are setting the record straight when there is a liar spreading wrong information about the project when he himself is the one breaking his rules an not OpenBSD. I you really meant everybody why did you not cc to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Even now after you were asked to do it?
Re: Real men don't attack straw men
Unix Fan wrote: As I've said, I think it's acceptable for free applications to run on non-free platforms (and say that they do), because this doesn't recommend the installation of those non-free platforms. But free systems should not recommend, suggest, or offer to install non-free apps. What is an operating system? An OS could be considered an application, Emacs/XEmacs is an excellent Microsoft Operating system shell to run. Manage your files and browse the web. It is released under the GPL (general public license). Running a program on Windows is not encouraging the use of Windows. Rather it is actually encouraging people to use Windows, you see. That's not the same thing. People publish screenshots of Emacs running on MS Windows and post them on the internet, and this is the enemy of your freedom. It shows how excellent XEmacs/Emacs run on Windows so that they don't even have to run gNewSense. When the dog wags his tail, the tail actually is wagging his dog. And when the tail wags the dog, the dog is actually wagging the tail. Not the other way around. Oranges are free, grapefruits are not. Oranges are free, grapefruits are not. Oranges are free, grapefruits are not. L505
Re: Richard Stallman...
[slight legibility edit] On Jan 5, 2008, at 9:39 AM, Marco Peereboom wrote: On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 07:30:36AM -0800, johan beisser wrote: On Jan 5, 2008, at 6:31 AM, Richard Stallman wrote: I doubt I would have looked at the AROS web site myself. To find out the status of the BSD systems, recently, I asked the FSF staff to check for me. Wait, you have someone else do the research, and this persons opinions get reflected in what you say? You don't have someone else factcheck, or double check these facts yourself? That's clearly a rhetorical question. I've gathered that. I'm hoping for a proper answer.
Re: Real men don't attack straw men
On Jan 5, 2008 11:28 PM, Karthik Kumar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I represent neither FSF nor OpenBSD. I probably represent the community which listens to the propagandas put across by both but wants to fight back against false marketing and for the right things TM. This is your website right? http://guilt.bafsoft.net/links.html If you think OpenBSD is not free then why did you put it under Free OSes in your site? == Free OSes OpenBSD link Debian link Slackware link Minix link OpenSolaris link == By now if you have been carefully studying you should have learned that OpenBSD ans OpenSolaris are as far as east is from the west when it comes to freedom? Or Are you also like RMS who knows nothing but opens his big mouth to utter nonsense? OpenBSD is free software that contains no blob, no closed-source object and that can be *fully* redistributed with no strings attached. You can buy the cd and do whatever you want as long as you retain the copyright on the files in it. You can take any part of OpenBSD and look at source for it, nothing is obfuscated. You can build a full OpenBSD system from the sources on the cvs. That's it. Yawn. Go to sleep and have a good night and come back in the morning with a fresh mind :-) What you do with it is not of our matter and we do not prevent you from installing a proprietary software on top of it. This is your call, what you do with what we provide you is none of our business, as long as you do not remove the copyright notice. My call: all lies and ego. Yup you are so important and famous that everyone should be discouraged about what you think and say!
Re: Richard Stallman...
On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 05:53:40PM +, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote: On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 08:47:16AM -0600, Gilles Chehade wrote: On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 11:53:30AM +, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote: On Fri, Jan 04, 2008 at 05:49:42PM -0600, Gilles Chehade wrote: Why didn't you answer my mail Rui ? You are a troll. Either I did and you missed it, or it wasn't the answer you'd expect or I found it so irrelevant it didn't even raise any bell. You have not answered at all, you have answered to other people so that you could dodge my embarassing question instead of explaining why it is different to do the exact same thing when you are from the FSF. I'm not from the FSF. I was making a generic statement. According to YOU, it is okay to have emacs and gcc run on a proprietary system as it allows more people to run free software. How is it that it is wrong to allow more people to run a free system by giving them links to proprietary software if it encourages them to keep their free system instead of switching to a proprietary one ? 1) ftp://ftp.openbsd.org/ isn't links ftp://ftp.openbsd.org/ only contains software that can legally be redistributed, not to mention that it is a repository for software that a user *explicitely* installs, not something that is part of the OS. 2) using more free software is better than not running it at all 3) incentivating usage of non-free software on free software operating systems doesn't incentivate the creation of free software replacements this is a word play. I know people who used OpenBSD for a while and stopped using it because a proprietary application they depended on was not available; and i know people who would use Linux/OpenBSD/whatever if emacs/gcc were not available and made so easy to use on Windows, because gcc is centric to their business and emacs integrates it so well. If the proprietary application was available, the lost openbsd users would be using *far more* free applications than the ones that are currently using emacs/gcc on Windows. 4) FYI I think the wine project is counter-productive as it enables running non-free software on free software operating systems, and as such de-incentivates the creation of replacements. 4.1) but it's free software and its authors have their own independence. I don't follow the wine project and I don't know how well it works, but getting Windows applications to run under a free system looks very productive to me. It means that I can remove Windows from my workstation without preventing my girlfriend from doing her work or changing her habits. And as a strange side-effect, she would be using a free system and many other free utilities. By providing emacs and gcc for windows you encourage people to run just a few free applications with proprietary system and (many) tools, while we just give people the freedom to install a proprietary application on top of a free system with free tools. Look, OpenBSD is aggressive enough that people who need such non-free software likely won't even run it on OpenBSD, so what you're saying is that to the convenience of a few people who don't care for freedom of all users, you distribute non-free software. I have not said such a thing and you are playing words again to prove some point. If an OpenBSD user needs a package for work and does not find it, he will switch to another system because he needs his work done. For the convenience of these users, we provide a subsystem that allows them to install the software they need and *that is not shipped with our system*. The packages in our ftp are packages we are legally allowed to distribute and are not part of the system. Users need to explicitely install them if they want so. Now, please, I suggest you get familiar with the goals and policy pages because you tend to mix OpenBSD goals with the ones from the FSF. Anyways, most of your emails have been so rude that in afterthought I shouldn't even honour you with a reply. I try hard to keep my emails insult-free, saying that they are rude for helping you avoid embarassing questions is what makes you a troll. Just like your friend Stallman, you play on words and act like a victim if a person points at the flaws in your reasonning, grow up. No, I am a victim and your (generically, not specifically you) attitude actually makes my relation with OpenBSD very frustrating. It saddens me, but your (that's you and mr Stallman) attitude is very irritating. I would suggest, for the benefit of all, that you both leave as it would lessen your frustration and my irritation ... Gilles -- Gilles Chehade
Re: Richard Stallman...
On Jan 5, 2008, at 9:53, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 08:47:16AM -0600, Gilles Chehade wrote: On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 11:53:30AM +, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote: On Fri, Jan 04, 2008 at 05:49:42PM -0600, Gilles Chehade wrote: Why didn't you answer my mail Rui ? You are a troll. Either I did and you missed it, or it wasn't the answer you'd expect or I found it so irrelevant it didn't even raise any bell. You have not answered at all, you have answered to other people so that you could dodge my embarassing question instead of explaining why it is different to do the exact same thing when you are from the FSF. I'm not from the FSF. According to YOU, it is okay to have emacs and gcc run on a proprietary system as it allows more people to run free software. How is it that it is wrong to allow more people to run a free system by giving them links to proprietary software if it encourages them to keep their free system instead of switching to a proprietary one ? 1) ftp://ftp.openbsd.org/ isn't links 2) using more free software is better than not running it at all 3) incentivating usage of non-free software on free software operating systems doesn't incentivate the creation of free software replacements 4) FYI I think the wine project is counter-productive as it enables running non-free software on free software operating systems, and as such de-incentivates the creation of replacements. 4.1) but it's free software and its authors have their own independence. By providing emacs and gcc for windows you encourage people to run just a few free applications with proprietary system and (many) tools, while we just give people the freedom to install a proprietary application on top of a free system with free tools. Look, OpenBSD is aggressive enough that people who need such non- free software likely won't even run it on OpenBSD, so what you're saying is that to the convenience of a few people who don't care for freedom of all users, you distribute non-free software. Anyways, most of your emails have been so rude that in afterthought I shouldn't even honour you with a reply. I try hard to keep my emails insult-free, saying that they are rude for helping you avoid embarassing questions is what makes you a troll. Just like your friend Stallman, you play on words and act like a victim if a person points No, I am a victim and your (generically, not specifically you) attitude actually makes my relation with OpenBSD very frustrating. So GTFO. Oh and lose the sig on a public mailing list. You don't like us we don't like you. You think we rank up there with baby killers. I will NEVER understand how that works so just FOAD and we can all be happy. Rui -- Wibble. Today is Setting Orange, the 5th day of Chaos in the YOLD 3174 Celebrate Mungday + No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown + Whatever you do will be insignificant, | but it is very important that you do it -- Gandhi + So let's do it...?
Re: Real men don't attack straw men
On Jan 5, 2008 11:24 PM, Karthik Kumar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: all that the people here do is bitch about and nothing more. Most of the devs in here are busy coding and not contributing to this thread. Theo and a few others were forced to respond because their project is being slandered and they were forced to let the world know the truth and expose a lying hippocrite.
Re: OT YAG Re: delete deleted data
On Sun, 6 Jan 2008, Shane J Pearson wrote: SNIP Where a mix of humans, transistors, valves, gears and three-phase motors/sensors, got the job done.;-) Shane No coal and steam? I had to say it. diana
Re: Richard Stallman...
Hello mini-RMS, Happy New Year greetings from gnu.misc.discuss! :-) On Jan 5, 2008 6:53 PM, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] I'm not from the FSF. Yeah, yeah. You're a kind of Richard Bruce Dick Cheney of National Association for Free Software, aren't you? A kind of fsf er.. fsa.pt (National) guy. No? http://babelfish.altavista.com/babelfish/trurl_pagecontent?lp=pt_entrurl=http%3a%2f%2fansol.org%2ffilosofia Peace out. regards, alexander.
amd64 assembly registers behavior and function calls
Are register values preserved between function calls on amd64? I'm pretty sure they are whipped out on i386, but I'm sure about amd64. Do I need to write parameters to %rbp offset, then follow the x86-abi for registers to write to before making the function call? When I disassemble C code, it looks like the parameters are written to %rbp, then to the registers per the x86-84 abi, and then the function is called? Is this the preferred way to write function calls? And I would use the same method to save the return value in %rax, right? Thanks, Brian Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search. http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping
Re: Real men don't attack straw men
Siju George wrote: On Jan 5, 2008 11:24 PM, Karthik Kumar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: When I said everybody, I meant Everybody. Not one person. Applying the same to OpenBSD, all that the people here do is bitch about and nothing more. NO! people here are not bitching, May be you are. People here are setting the record straight when there is a liar spreading wrong information about the project when he himself is the one breaking his rules an not OpenBSD. I you really meant everybody why did you not cc to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Even now after you were asked to do it? methinks the proper word is: AMEN! Unless I'm really confused, this *IS* misc@OPENBSD.ORG not [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Real men don't attack straw men
On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 11:39:17PM +0530, Karthik Kumar wrote: Here is one: http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions/2005-March/081313.html Notice how Theo talks about because their firmware images were not free enough to ship in our releases I suppose you can now explain the meaning of the term free in firmware in this context? Don't assume people don't read before replying in here. I don't know about people, but YOU don't read before replying. Please, read before you reply ... you are calling for rudeness. Firmware are not free enough when they have a license that does not allow them to be redistributed with the system. -- Gilles Chehade
Re: OT YAG Re: delete deleted data
On Jan 5, 2008, at 8:06 AM, Shane J Pearson wrote: I think the first computers I witnessed in a work place, were actually analog computers (Navy). Where a mix of humans, transistors, valves, gears and three-phase motors/sensors, got the job done.;-) They're still in use as of the late 90s.
Re: Real men don't attack straw men
On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 11:51:39PM +0530, Karthik Kumar wrote: Then you are misunderstanding OpenBSD's goals which are clearly stated at the link I provided you and that you obviously failed to read. I understand the goals that are not written on that page: do what you like and fight for what you believe in. Goals are just text written in a stupid web page until you live up to them. You are spouting non-sense. These are goals we fight for and believe in. It is only from the eyes of a fsf zealot that words are meant to be twisted. Again: show us all where we are doing the opposite of what is written in these pages. OpenBSD is free software that contains no blob, no closed-source object and that can be *fully* redistributed with no strings attached. You can buy the cd and do whatever you want as long as you retain the copyright on the files in it. You can take any part of OpenBSD and look at source for it, nothing is obfuscated. You can build a full OpenBSD system from the sources on the cvs. That's it. Yawn. And it makes the flash installation faster after you've built it from the CVS. We do not provide flash, we provide a Makefile which will allow someone to install flash if he wants to. This Makefile is not even part of the system and needs to be fetched manually by the user. This is *NOT* against goals, which you do not want to read. I use ports. I am not dumb. :P The goals do not specify to encourage people to use non-free software, but I see that happening anyway. The goals do not specify prevent users from running non-free software. The goals do not mention anything about what people ought to do with our software, we are NOT the fucking FSF. Please stop making uninformed claims, read the goals and policy page which are accessible from the very home page of the project. I am not uninformed. What makes you say that? You, sir are biased towards OpenBSD and you can say what you want but it doesn't make your version of the truth any better. You are misinformed because you keep arguing about things as if they are wrong, yet they are only wrong from an FSF point of view. It is not wrong and unethical to run proprietary software, I do it every day and I do not feel wrong about it. It is only unethical in the eyes of a fsf zealot. Please point out where OpenBSD is in breach with its goals and license. You failed to read two pages and to point out where we are going against our own claims. My call: troll. Your own claims? 1. (Try to be the #1 most secure operating system). Google for adobe flash player vulnerabilities. OpenBSD does not ship with a flash player. If you have one, you installed it yourself as I don't have one. 2. Do not let serious problems sit unsolved. I see that you people only fight about it and pretend it has never been a problem. Show us a sitting problem that needs to be resolved, until know you have been talking and failed to point out anything I kindly asked you to point. -- Gilles Chehade
Re: Real men don't attack straw men
On Jan 6, 2008 12:26 AM, Siju George [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Jan 5, 2008 11:28 PM, Karthik Kumar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I represent neither FSF nor OpenBSD. I probably represent the community which listens to the propagandas put across by both but wants to fight back against false marketing and for the right things TM. This is your website right? http://guilt.bafsoft.net/links.html If you think OpenBSD is not free then why did you put it under Free OSes in your site? == Free OSes OpenBSD link Debian link Slackware link Minix link OpenSolaris link == It even has Debian and Slackware; Which contain lots of non-free software. It's been a while since I removed links on that page. And for the information I very much use OpenBSD. Maybe I should change the title to Free as in beer OSes. By now if you have been carefully studying you should have learned that OpenBSD ans OpenSolaris are as far as east is from the west when it comes to freedom? All I see is a set of groups spreading propaganda in their own interests. I take no sides. :-) BSD 4.2 - 4.4 - 4.4 Lite - OpenBSD; 4.2 - SunOS - OpenSolaris; Maybe someone might fork OpenBSD in the future and make money. Too early to decide. Or Are you also like RMS who knows nothing but opens his big mouth to utter nonsense? I'm not RMS and don't compare one person with another. Go to sleep and have a good night and come back in the morning with a fresh mind :-) It's 1:25 am already. With some luck I can keep replying and stay awake ;) Yup you are so important and famous that everyone should be discouraged about what you think and say! I'm not forcing that opinion on anybody. Like it or leave it. -- Karthik http://guilt.bafsoft.net
Re: Advice requested on security issues
On 05/01/2008, Douglas A. Tutty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 2: Space for the P3 is limited and I would like to remove its printer and print bank statements across the LAN on the main PC (running Linux, or maybe FreeBSD in future) using CUPS. Does this introduce security risks? Why would you need CUPS on the P3? Shouldn't the bsd lpd be able to send the bank statement over to the other box to then get formatted and printed? lpd is in base already. I wasn't aware that LPD could do the remote printing - I've always used CUPS on Linux - thanks for the info. This seems the favourable option since I then don't need to introduce CUPS into the OBSD box. Does running Firefox on the banking computer, even if it is running on OpenBSD, cause any concerns? Is there a more secure browser that will still work with the bank's system? I'm assuming that the base Lynx won't work (if it will, just use that). No, I can't see Lynx doing this job - yes Firefox is a concern as it is becoming so popular and seems to have a lot of security updates which may be indicative of its lack of quality (certainly not up to OBSD standards). However some banks seem to create complex web pages so the browser needs to be reasonably good at rendering pages. If there is a graphical browser which is more secure and might do the job, I'd be pleased to know about it. Will you sit down at a separate screen/keyboard on the OpenBSD banking computer or will you access it via ssh? I had planned to use a separate screen/keyboard. Keeping things physically separate is part of the security as there is less dependence on avoiding errors in setup. I might look to acquire an old laptop in due course to reduce space requirements. Would forwarding X via ssh from the banking machine to your main machine make banking any less secure? I suppose if the main machine were infected it could read your keystrokes as you type in passwords. Indeed Perhaps you could use the banking machine as your main access point, running apps on the main box via ssh. Would that introduce any insecurity in the banking machine? I don't know the answer to your last question - was it rhetorical? Actually I hadn't thought of this. Are you saying that nothing could get down the ssh tunnel from the main box into the banking box? I guess I will have to look into how ssh works - something I've not had any need to use. The banking box has poorer graphics capability so this wouldn't do a good job of running main box apps. But something to keep in mind. Thanks for all your comments - appreciated.
Re: Richard Stallman...
On Jan 5, 2008 12:53 PM, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote: 4) FYI I think the wine project is counter-productive as it enables running non-free software on free software operating systems, and as such de-incentivates the creation of replacements. 4.1) but it's free software and its authors have their own independence. It makes good sense to establish principles and stick to them. It makes sense that different people have different principles and will criticize one another on the basis of them. But I think it is important to recognize that what furthers adoption of free software over non-free software is complicated and does not seem to follow from any simple rule. For instance, it seems to you that the Wine project is counter-productive. But the Wine project is inseparable from winelib. If you're not already familiar with winelib, check it out--then I'd be curious to know if you still think the Wine project is counterproductive, considering that there are many free applications that are Windows-only for technical reasons arising out of decisions made early in their development. Separately from this, Wine enables people who retain Windows for a few applications to switch over entirely to other operating systems. How do you balance this effect against your suggested effect of discouraging development of free replacements to software? What would you need to know to actually know that Wine was ultimately counterproductive, or ultimately productive? When it comes right down to it, a lot of the arguments about what do and will have what effect don't stand up unless supported with statistical evidence. This is the sort of thing you could publish a paper on, or maybe a book. But there is no reason for anybody to buy any argument about what specific kinds of free software encourage adoption of free software that doesn't provide something approaching hard evidence. It is one thing to say that there is a way for a project to be run that is most ethical. It is another to say that this will have the most ethical effects in the long run. There is no reason to believe that what has the best effects in the long run is necessarily the right thing, but then again, if it turns out that the ethical thing usually leads to unethical results in the long run, it is worth examining one's ethics. -Eliah
Re: Real men don't attack straw men
Richard, isn't: Run GNOME in a **VMWare Player** in a Linux virtual machine. Or: Run GNOME on a virtual machine using QEMU on Linux or **Parallels** for **Mac** or Linux. promoting the use of non-free software? http://torrent.gnome.org/ GNOME _is_ a GNU package. Greetings!
Re: Real men don't attack straw men
Richard, Linux is not free software, as you have already stated, please change your religion, so users don't get confused. Emacs was originally a text editor, but it became a way of life and a religion. To join the Church of Emacs, you need only say the Confession of the Faith three times: There is no system but GNU, and Linux is one of its kernels. http://www.stallman.org/saint.html Greetings!
Re: Real men don't attack straw men
On 05/01/2008, Karthik Kumar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I use ports. I am not dumb. :P The goals do not specify to encourage people to use non-free software, but I see that happening anyway. And so what? I think you were trying to prove that OpenBSD were not living up to their goals. Instead you are repeating what RMS started out with. Try actually showing us one of OpenBSD's goals that the project is not following. Your own claims? 1. (Try to be the #1 most secure operating system). Google for adobe flash player vulnerabilities. What are you on about? As people have tried to explain again and again, OpenBSD does not ship with adobe flash player. Did you understand the Secure by Default mode? Jacob Grydholt
Re: OT YAG Re: delete deleted data
On Saturday 05 January 2008 09:57:54 Diana Eichert wrote: Okay, someone touched on this so I'll follow it a little further. Say you pull the platter(s) out of the drive and now start analysing the data as analog voltage levels and not highs/lows with threshold. Also, get the data off the platter(s) by driving a head across it in different directions. Now start doing signal processing on the data set(s) you've acquired. Any EE worth their weight in salt understands signal processing. I do believe a lot of younger engineers have grown up in the 1 0 digital world and forget about analog. g.day diana Yeah, analog stuff is sorely lacking, as if RF stuff today. My only comment about data resurrection is that I'll bet that good analog data from the disk varies with the density. Getting data off an 800M to couple G disk? Absolutely. But I wonder far more about a 1T disk. I'm not saying it can't be done; logic says that disks of the modern era should still be destroyed, but I'd love to know how much data gets garbled when sniffing really high density disks. --STeve Andre'
Re: Real men don't attack straw men
On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 11:28:24PM +0530, Karthik Kumar wrote: I represent neither FSF nor OpenBSD. I probably represent the community which listens to the propagandas put across by both but wants to fight back against false marketing and for the right things TM. Great. The first step is to inform yourself to that your role evolves from one who listens to one who understands.
Re: Real men don't attack straw men
Firmware are not free enough when they have a license that does not allow them to be redistributed with the system. You are talking of free as in freedom and not price, right? If the whole point was to avoid paying $$$ in OpenBSD, my bad. -- Gilles Chehade -- Karthik http://guilt.bafsoft.net
Re: Real men don't attack straw men
Karthik Kumar wrote: On Jan 5, 2008 11:20 PM, William Boshuck [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 09:58:47PM +0530, Karthik Kumar wrote: On another hand we are not GNU/GPL and we don't mind our users installing non free software if it is what they want. The FAQ is where this needs to be documented for users to get their job done faster. If you don't mind users using non-free software, you shouldn't be putting the 'Free. ' in 'Free. Functional. Secure.' The word 'free' is there because OpenBSD is free. It is not there because developers mind or don't mind users doing this or that. You're missing the point why somebody is calling OpenBSD non-free. Or supposedly why emacs runs on non-free. ; You shouldn't be fighting those blob vendors and call them nasty names; Rather, probably document how to use such drivers and firmware 'faster'. Should you wish to inform yourself, there are a number of posts in the list archives explaining various specific reasons why the OpenBSD developers are against blobs. Theo, in particular, wrote at least one rather short and very cogent message explaining the reasons. You should look towards the beginning of the threads, because later on you are more likely to see Theo losing patience with respondents who did not read the original posts (carefully enough, or perhaps not at all). Here is one: http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions/2005-Marc h/081313.html Notice how Theo talks about because their firmware images were not free enough to ship in our releases in context: because their firmware images were not free enough to ship in our releases, and after 6 months of wasting our time and being stalemated, we informed Qlogic and our user community (as well as YOUR user community) that we were removing the support for their controllers. A few days later the firmware was free. Are you complaining because Theo actually accomplished something?
Re: Real men don't attack straw men
--- Karthik Kumar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Use of non-free software is highly harmful to your computer and ethics. Please cite a piece of software that can harm my computer merely because it is non-free in the FSF/GNU sense. And you should probably qualify that ethics remark with: Should you be an extremist of sorts... On a more serious note: everybody who criticizes the other of non-free software must come clean first: No clean, no talk. Sophistry. If there is problems in logic, etc then one need not be of a certain type (with respect to what you're saying) to realize that nor point it out. To say so is asinine (above as well). On a more general note, I'd (and I imagine a lot of people on misc@ too) would appreciate before any more replies are sent from the religious people, please religious people, read: Pay special attention to the Fanaticism type: http://criticalsnips.wordpress.com/category/postman/ Link to full text within: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_bullshit And really really reflect on this before you reply. best regards, Reid Nichol President Bush says: War Is Peace Freedom Is Slavery Ignorance Is Strength Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page. http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
Re: Real men don't attack straw men
On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 11:51:39PM +0530, Karthik Kumar wrote: Then you are misunderstanding OpenBSD's goals which are clearly stated at the link I provided you and that you obviously failed to read. I understand the goals that are not written on that page: do what you like and fight for what you believe in. Goals are just text written in a stupid web page until you live up to them. And we do unlike some netcook who likes to twist words. OpenBSD is free software that contains no blob, no closed-source object and that can be *fully* redistributed with no strings attached. You can buy the cd and do whatever you want as long as you retain the copyright on the files in it. You can take any part of OpenBSD and look at source for it, nothing is obfuscated. You can build a full OpenBSD system from the sources on the cvs. That's it. Yawn. And it makes the flash installation faster after you've built it from the CVS. We do not provide flash, we provide a Makefile which will allow someone to install flash if he wants to. This Makefile is not even part of the system and needs to be fetched manually by the user. This is *NOT* against goals, which you do not want to read. I use ports. I am not dumb. :P The goals do not specify to encourage people to use non-free software, but I see that happening anyway. You do? What does that make you? You are the one making the decision to install it. If you can use the ports system you probably know at a high level what you are doing. You might or might not care about free (your definition) or non-free (again your definition) software. You are calling that person retarded and unable to make up his/her own mind. That attitude is repugnant and oppressive. I hope for you that your freedom won't be taken from you and that someone calls you retarded for making your own decisions. Please stop making uninformed claims, read the goals and policy page which are accessible from the very home page of the project. I am not uninformed. What makes you say that? You, sir are biased towards OpenBSD and you can say what you want but it doesn't make your version of the truth any better. You failed to read two pages and to point out where we are going against our own claims. My call: troll. Your own claims? 1. (Try to be the #1 most secure operating system). Google for adobe flash player vulnerabilities. Which doesn't run on OpenBSD but does run on Linux. Oh oh wait, GNU/Linux because FSF did all the work; oh wait it didn't it is just a farce. 2. Do not let serious problems sit unsolved. I see that you people only fight about it and pretend it has never been a problem. It isn't a problem and until you get that through your skull you'll keep parroting one FSF representative. -- Gilles Chehade -- Karthik http://guilt.bafsoft.net
Re: Real men don't attack straw men
On 06/01/2008, at 3:28 AM, Karthik Kumar wrote: On another hand we are not GNU/GPL and we don't mind our users installing non free software if it is what they want. The FAQ is where this needs to be documented for users to get their job done faster. If you don't mind users using non-free software, you shouldn't be putting the 'Free. ' in 'Free. Functional. Secure.' Huh? OpenBSD is built from free software and allows users the freedom to do what they please, even if that means running non-free software. You have a strange idea of free. An OpenBSD user exercising freedom of choice, by choosing to use some non-free software, does not make OpenBSD non or less free. Shane
Re: Richard Stallman...
Oh, the real troll just arrived (one more list where he get's to the kill file). On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 07:52:34PM +0100, Alexander Terekhov wrote: On Jan 5, 2008 6:53 PM, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] I'm not from the FSF. Yeah, yeah. You're a kind of Richard Bruce Dick Cheney of National Association for Free Software, aren't you? A kind of fsf er.. fsa.pt (National) guy. No? http://babelfish.altavista.com/babelfish/trurl_pagecontent?lp=pt_entrurl=http%3a%2f%2fansol.org%2ffilosofia Which is a totally disparate entity from the FSF, and only exists through the work of volunteers. It promotes Free Software, be it any BSD operating system or GNU/Linux one, or any other Free Software program. Rui -- This statement is false. Today is Setting Orange, the 5th day of Chaos in the YOLD 3174 Celebrate Mungday + No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown + Whatever you do will be insignificant, | but it is very important that you do it -- Gandhi + So let's do it...?
Re: Real men don't attack straw men
On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 11:39:17PM +0530, Karthik Kumar wrote: On Jan 5, 2008 11:20 PM, William Boshuck [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 09:58:47PM +0530, Karthik Kumar wrote: On another hand we are not GNU/GPL and we don't mind our users installing non free software if it is what they want. The FAQ is where this needs to be documented for users to get their job done faster. If you don't mind users using non-free software, you shouldn't be putting the 'Free. ' in 'Free. Functional. Secure.' The word 'free' is there because OpenBSD is free. It is not there because developers mind or don't mind users doing this or that. You're missing the point why somebody is calling OpenBSD non-free. Such a somebody is mistaken. Full stop. The point why somebody issues mistaken pronouncements is not my concern. Should you wish to inform yourself, there are a number of posts in the list archives explaining various specific reasons why the OpenBSD developers are against blobs. Theo, in particular, wrote at least one rather short and very cogent message explaining the reasons. You should look towards the beginning of the threads, because later on you are more likely to see Theo losing patience with respondents who did not read the original posts (carefully enough, or perhaps not at all). Here is one: http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions/2005-March/081313.html A swing and a miss.
Re: Advice requested on security issues
On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 11:36:04AM -0500, Douglas A. Tutty wrote: Perhaps you could use the banking machine as your main access point, running apps on the main box via ssh. Would that introduce any insecurity in the banking machine? I certainly wouldn't do sensitive things on an X server with untrusted clients. What makes you think a remote X client is any less dangerous than a local one? -- Jussi Peltola
Re: Real men don't attack straw men
(apologies to Karthik who will receive this mail twice) On 05/01/2008, Karthik Kumar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Jan 5, 2008 11:20 PM, William Boshuck [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 09:58:47PM +0530, Karthik Kumar wrote: On another hand we are not GNU/GPL and we don't mind our users installing non free software if it is what they want. The FAQ is where this needs to be documented for users to get their job done faster. If you don't mind users using non-free software, you shouldn't be putting the 'Free. ' in 'Free. Functional. Secure.' The word 'free' is there because OpenBSD is free. It is not there because developers mind or don't mind users doing this or that. You're missing the point why somebody is calling OpenBSD non-free. Or supposedly why emacs runs on non-free. And you apparently missed the posts where the leading developers of OpenBSD stated that they don't care about your definition of free. As a non-English speaker I am aware of the multifacetted English word 'Free' and its many connotations. So it is not hard for OpenBSD to name itself free. Coming out and saying that OpenBSD should not call itself free because it freely allows users to install non-free software is gNonsense. ; You shouldn't be fighting those blob vendors and call them nasty names; Rather, probably document how to use such drivers and firmware 'faster'. Should you wish to inform yourself, there are a number of posts in the list archives explaining various specific reasons why the OpenBSD developers are against blobs. Theo, in particular, wrote at least one rather short and very cogent message explaining the reasons. You should look towards the beginning of the threads, because later on you are more likely to see Theo losing patience with respondents who did not read the original posts (carefully enough, or perhaps not at all). Here is one: http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions/2005-March/081313.html Notice how Theo talks about because their firmware images were not free enough to ship in our releases I suppose you can now explain the meaning of the term free in firmware in this context? Don't assume people don't read before replying in here. I assume that Theo were not referring to firmware supposed to run in the kernel but on some kind of expansion card. Furthermore, I assume that the original firmware license prohibited free distribution. In any case: what is your point? Jacob Grydholt
Suggested PF Setup when using BitTorrent?
Is there any suggested PF setup when using BitTorrent? Right now, the biggest problem I have when using BitTorrent is watchdog timeouts. Thanks, Brian Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page. http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
Re: Richard Stallman...
On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 05:53:40PM +, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote: ... you distribute non-free software. It has been pointed out on numerous occasions that this is a false statement. No, I am a victim Only because you elect to remain uninformed.
Re: amd64 assembly registers behavior and function calls
On 1/5/08, Brian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Are register values preserved between function calls on amd64? I'm pretty sure they are whipped out on i386, but I'm sure about amd64. Do I need to write parameters to %rbp offset, then follow the x86-abi for registers to write to before making the function call? When I disassemble C code, it looks like the parameters are written to %rbp, then to the registers per the x86-84 abi, and then the function is called? Is this the preferred way to write function calls? And I would use the same method to save the return value in %rax, right? it should be spilling the old register values to the stack, not the new arguments. arguments after 4 do go on the stack though.
Re: Real men don't attack straw men
Reid Nichol wrote: --- Karthik Kumar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Use of non-free software is highly harmful to your computer and ethics. Please cite a piece of software that can harm my computer merely because it is non-free in the FSF/GNU sense. And you should probably qualify that ethics remark with: Should you be an extremist of sorts... Eggs are harmful because they do not come with reproductive chickens. Books are harmful because they can be photocopied and we are not allowed to resell them without complicated permission first. The photocopier is the machine that makes copying books virtually free.. similar to CD-ROM drives. The chicken is the machine that makes copying eggs virtually free.. similar to CD-ROM drives. Yet there is no free book license or free egg license, because personal source comments in code are different than personal comments and algorithms on paper in O'Reilly books. Source comments, inside code.. ARE a book. My code always contains plenty of personal comments around my algorithms explaining why I came up with that algorithm and how the person can use the algorithm. L505
Re: Real men don't attack straw men
Karthik Kumar wrote: Firmware are not free enough when they have a license that does not allow them to be redistributed with the system. You are talking of free as in freedom and not price, right? If the whole point was to avoid paying $$$ in OpenBSD, my bad. The GNG foundation speaks of free as in sex, not cost. Firmware goes into software.
Re: Real men don't attack straw men
Karthik Kumar wrote: It's been a while since I removed links on that page. And for the information I very much use OpenBSD. Maybe I should change the title to Free as in beer OSes. No. Free is free. Free as in beer is unethical to children who view the website and wonder what beer tastes like and get drunk because they read beer was something that was good on the GNU site. Since free as in beer is on the site, it restricts children from knowing what the site means as they have never tried beer. But now they want to drink under the age because of Stallman. Stop playing with phrases. Free as in sex, is what you use. That way, you confuse people even more. The software and hardware involved, makes more sense to everyone when it is explained in terms of sexuality. http://z505.com/gng/
Re: delete deleted data
Unix Fan wrote: L wrote: Restoring files from FAT partitions is easy.. I use fatback(http://sf.net/projects/fatback)... I will check that one out.. But either way, no such utility exists to restore data that has been overwritten.. regardless of the algorithms used. Unless there was a magnetic offline hardware utility of some sort that scanned magnetic fields?
Re: Richard Stallman...
On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 01:51:22PM -0500, Eliah Kagan wrote: On Jan 5, 2008 12:53 PM, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote: 4) FYI I think the wine project is counter-productive as it enables running non-free software on free software operating systems, and as such de-incentivates the creation of replacements. 4.1) but it's free software and its authors have their own independence. (...) discouraging development of free replacements to software? What would you need to know to actually know that Wine was ultimately counterproductive, or ultimately productive? When it comes right down The world is not made of such extremes, fortunately. It is counterproductive in so far as to promoting the development of Free Software that replaces proprietary programs running on Windows. If this is not clear to you, please help me be more clear. Rui -- Umlaut Zebra |ber alles! Today is Setting Orange, the 5th day of Chaos in the YOLD 3174 Celebrate Mungday + No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown + Whatever you do will be insignificant, | but it is very important that you do it -- Gandhi + So let's do it...?
Re: Running dhclient on CARP interfaces
The really cool combination of CARP and ifstated enabled a nice
work-around. The attached ifstated.conf works great in my
active-passive firewall cluster setup. At least it survived all
violent testing conducted over the past few hours. But it still needs
to prove itself in the longer term.
Actually, this solution does more than simply running dhclient on CARP
would do. With one exception: I could not you figure out how to
transition from a passive-active firewall cluster to an active-active
configuration without having a CARP interface with a dynamic IP
address that connects to the ISP. Therefore, I would still be
interested in getting dhclient to work on a CARP interface.
Also, I welcome your feedback about the solution outlined below.
Thanks,
Rolf
A few remarks on the ifstated.conf shown below:
a) vlan11 is a VLAN bound to the same NIC as carp12. dhclient is run
on vlan11 (Actually, carp12 is bound to vlan11, which in turn is bound
to the physical NIC liniking to upstream).. dhclient assigns the
dynamic IP address to vlan11 whenever a node of a cluster is in master
state. Nodes in backup state kill dhclient, delete the dynamic IP
address from their vlan11, change the default route from the ISP
router to the firewall's virtual cluster address (which is here
carp100 = 10.0.0.1) and kill and restart some daemons with some
modified parameters:
- dhcpd runs only on the master node;
- ntpd pn the backup node(s) get their time reference from the master
node, to avoid doubling the load on external time servers;
- only one ez-ipupdate instance running on the master node takes care
of updating my dynamic DNS service provider;
b) carp12 is a CARP interface on the same NIC that connects to the ISP
modem. carp12 is bound to a fixed IP address. The ifstated
configuration below uses it just for detecting the state(-changes) of
the upstream link, e.g. it is not the CARP interface I would like to
run dhclient on (which would be carp11).
c) You can replace vlan11 by any other vlan, or by a phsyical
interface, such as fxp2 for example. You can replace carp12 by any
other CARP interface as long as it is a reliable state indicator of
each node in the cluster.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:root]# cat /etc/ifstated.conf
init-state startState
carpUp = carp12.link.up
carpDown = !carp12.link.up
state startState {
if $carpUp
set-state masterState
if $carpDown
set-state backupState
}
state masterState {
init {
# assert services are killed to avoid duplicates in case the were still up,
# for ex. after a restart of ifstated restart while masterState was never left
run /usr/bin/pkill -9 ntpd
run /usr/bin/pkill -9 dhcpd
run /usr/bin/pkill -9 ez-ipupdate
run /usr/bin/pkill -9 dhclient
run /sbin/dhclient vlan11
run /usr/local/bin/ez-ipupdate -c /etc/ez-ipupdate.conf
run /usr/sbin/dhcpd
#run /usr/sbin/ntpd -s -f /etc/ntpd_masterState.conf
run /usr/sbin/ntpd -f /etc/ntpd_masterState.conf
}
if $carpDown set-state backupState
}
state backupState {
init {
run /usr/bin/pkill -9 ntpd
run /usr/bin/pkill -9 dhcpd
run /usr/bin/pkill -9 ez-ipupdate
run /usr/bin/pkill -9 dhclient
run /sbin/ifconfig vlan11 delete
run /sbin/route change default 10.0.0.1
#run /usr/sbin/ntpd -s -f /etc/ntpd_backupState.conf
run /usr/sbin/ntpd -f /etc/ntpd_backupState.conf
}
if $carpUp set-state masterState
}
