Re: [arch-general] Linux Kernel capabilities

2015-07-17 Thread arnaud gaboury
On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 1:08 PM, Jens Adam j...@byte.cx wrote: Unfortunately, it doesn't work and needed modules are not loaded from container but only from host. I realized there is no #define CAP_SYS_MODULE in /usr/lib/modules/4.1.2-2-ARCH/build/include/linux/capability.h. Look at

Re: [arch-general] current flash vulnerabilities - what to do?

2015-07-17 Thread Christian Demsar
On Fri, Jul 17, 2015, at 02:13 AM, Ralf Mardorf wrote: In Western civilisations we seldom need TOR, what we need are less bloated browsers, that still provide some comfort. There are a few minimalist browsers out there. Gnome, KDE, and XFCE all have them. The basic comfort I require is

Re: [arch-general] current flash vulnerabilities - what to do?

2015-07-17 Thread Daniel Micay
On 16/07/15 11:30 PM, Natu wrote: On 07/16/2015 05:50 PM, Daniel Micay wrote: I don't know that I even trust openssl anymore. I used to run chromium, but got tired of it passing so much information back to google, so I went back to firefox. What I run is not an ideal solution. I'm open to

Re: [arch-general] current flash vulnerabilities - what to do?

2015-07-17 Thread Ralf Mardorf
On Thu, 16 Jul 2015 16:01:42 -0700, Natu wrote: Tor browser Tor browser not necessarily is slow, but it is missing comfort such as a history. I need around 1½ hours to compile a kernel with a default Arch configuration and around 3½ hours to compile Firefox. In Western civilisations we seldom

Re: [arch-general] current flash vulnerabilities - what to do?

2015-07-17 Thread Florian Pelz
On 07/17/2015 01:01 AM, Natu wrote: On 07/16/2015 02:55 PM, Ralf Mardorf wrote: On Thu, 16 Jul 2015 13:43:25 -0700, Natu wrote: And yes, you have to turn off features in firefox to avoid similar spying behavior, but it can be done without maintaining your own version of the source code. But

Re: [arch-general] current flash vulnerabilities - what to do?

2015-07-17 Thread Ralf Mardorf
On Fri, 17 Jul 2015 11:30:05 -0400, Daniel Micay wrote: The Tor browser is quite insecure. It's nearly the same thing as Firefox, so it falls near the bottom of the list when it comes to browser security, i.e. below even Internet Explorer, which has a basic sandbox (but not nearly on par with

[arch-general] Linux Kernel capabilities

2015-07-17 Thread arnaud gaboury
I build my own kernel with ABS. To allow my nspawn container to load kernel modules, I must add this to nspawn unit file: --capability=CAP_SYS_MODULE. Unfortunately, it doesn't work and needed modules are not loaded from container but only from host. I realized there is no #define

Re: [arch-general] Linux Kernel capabilities

2015-07-17 Thread Patrick Burroughs (Celti)
On Fri, 17 Jul 2015 12:20:39 +0200 arnaud gaboury arnaud.gabo...@gmail.com wrote: I build my own kernel with ABS. To allow my nspawn container to load kernel modules, I must add this to nspawn unit file: --capability=CAP_SYS_MODULE. Unfortunately, it doesn't work and needed modules are

Re: [arch-general] Linux Kernel capabilities

2015-07-17 Thread arnaud gaboury
Not at all, but you are right, it is not mentioned in systemd-nspawn man. But according to Mr Systemd, it is a valid option. On Fri, Jul 17, 2015, 12:42 PM Patrick Burroughs (Celti) ce...@celti.name wrote: On Fri, 17 Jul 2015 12:20:39 +0200 arnaud gaboury arnaud.gabo...@gmail.com wrote: I

Re: [arch-general] Linux Kernel capabilities

2015-07-17 Thread arnaud gaboury
On Fri, Jul 17, 2015, 12:42 PM Patrick Burroughs (Celti) ce...@celti.name wrote: On Fri, 17 Jul 2015 12:20:39 +0200 arnaud gaboury arnaud.gabo...@gmail.com wrote: I build my own kernel with ABS. To allow my nspawn container to load kernel modules, I must add this to nspawn unit file:

Re: [arch-general] Linux Kernel capabilities

2015-07-17 Thread Jens Adam
Unfortunately, it doesn't work and needed modules are not loaded from container but only from host. I realized there is no #define CAP_SYS_MODULE in /usr/lib/modules/4.1.2-2-ARCH/build/include/linux/capability.h. Look at /usr/include/linux/capability.h (linux-api-headers) instead. It

Re: [arch-general] current flash vulnerabilities - what to do?

2015-07-17 Thread Jagannathan Tiruvallur Eachambadi
On Fri, 17 Jul 2015 at 22:30 Daniel Micay danielmi...@gmail.com wrote: If you want Chromium without Google integration then you can use Iridium. It doesn't remove any tracking / spying code though. There wasn't any to remove. Their redefinition of tracking just means support for any service

Re: [arch-general] current flash vulnerabilities - what to do?

2015-07-17 Thread Daniel Micay
On 17/07/15 01:14 PM, Jagannathan Tiruvallur Eachambadi wrote: We don't have it in the AUR though. Well, I don't really think it's useful. It was just a suggestion for people who can't tolerate Chromium downloading things like dictionaries from Google. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP

Re: [arch-general] current flash vulnerabilities - what to do?

2015-07-17 Thread Daniel Micay
On 17/07/15 12:35 PM, Ralf Mardorf wrote: On Fri, 17 Jul 2015 11:30:05 -0400, Daniel Micay wrote: The Tor browser is quite insecure. It's nearly the same thing as Firefox, so it falls near the bottom of the list when it comes to browser security, i.e. below even Internet Explorer, which has a