Hi!
I can't apt-get update testing/updates main:
Failed to fetch
http://security.debian.org/dists/testing/updates/main/binary-i386/Packages.bz2
MD5Sum mismatch
The Release file has this MD5 sum:
b6465c8fe5c1ecb2eb67d22100a78dd745569 main/binary-i386/Packages.bz2
The Packages.bz2 files
Hello Lupe,
how long have you noticed this mismatch? I mean, an update on the mirror
could be taking place, and the Packages.bz2 file not yet been updated...
Jonás.
On 8/17/07, Lupe Christoph [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi!
I can't apt-get update testing/updates main:
Failed to fetch
On Friday, 2007-08-17 at 12:12:38 +0200, Jonas Andradas wrote:
how long have you noticed this mismatch? I mean, an update on the mirror
could be taking place, and the Packages.bz2 file not yet been updated...
On 8/17/07, Lupe Christoph [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Failed to fetch
On Fri, Aug 17, 2007 at 12:20:34PM +0200, Lupe Christoph wrote:
On Friday, 2007-08-17 at 12:12:38 +0200, Jonas Andradas wrote:
how long have you noticed this mismatch? I mean, an update on the mirror
could be taking place, and the Packages.bz2 file not yet been updated...
On 8/17/07,
On Thu, Aug 16, 2007 at 03:42:07PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
R. W. Rodolico [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
At this point, I disagree. Unfortunately, I have to point to some of the
user oriented firewalls you get for windoze (which, to my knowledge,
Linux does not have). When they are
On Friday, 2007-08-17 at 10:46:32 +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Aug 17, 2007 at 12:20:34PM +0200, Lupe Christoph wrote:
I *wish* those updates
were atomic, but they probably arent'.
why not though ?
Because they involve a lot of files. You would have to use two areas
that
Hi,
On Fri Aug 17, 2007 at 13:12:34 +0200, Lupe Christoph wrote:
On Friday, 2007-08-17 at 10:46:32 +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Aug 17, 2007 at 12:20:34PM +0200, Lupe Christoph wrote:
I *wish* those updates
were atomic, but they probably arent'.
why not though ?
On Thu, 16 Aug 2007 18:21:59 -0500 (CDT)
R. W. Rodolico [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[snip]
Firewalls are for a stupidity shield. I had a situation where I was
cracked on one of my servers a few years ago. It was totally my fault; I
had a user I had mistakingly set up as an authorized ssh user
On Thu, 16 Aug 2007 16:49:36 -0700
Russ Allbery [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[snip]
Firewalls are good in the situation where, whenever you open up new
network access, you want to have to make that choice independently in
multiple locations. I'm dubious that this matches the desires of the
On Thu, 16 Aug 2007 17:11:54 -0700
Rick Moen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[snip]
My perspective is influenced by the fact that all attempts to help
debug Linux networking failures have to start with What does
/sbin/iptables L, run as root, say? and What's in /etc/hosts.allow and
/etc/hosts.deny?
Celejar [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Just curious; anyone can forget a user account, but how did the
attacker get root?
There are a *lot* more privilege escalation attacks than there are remote
exploits. Just in the Linux kernel, a new one seems to show up every six
months or so.
--
Russ
Quoting Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
Celejar [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Just curious; anyone can forget a user account, but how did the
attacker get root?
There are a *lot* more privilege escalation attacks than there are remote
exploits. Just in the Linux kernel, a new one seems
Pat wrote:
I apologize if I have offended anyone with my responses. My initial
post was one mentioning
what I saw to be a problem in an attempt to help the community at
large but some persons took offense.
I don't think so. This is merely a lively discussion. A bit of
philosophy which can be
Pat wrote:
Whose responsibility is it, in the US if you manufacture a defective
product legally it is your responsibility if someone is harmed.
There's a bit of a difference between a defective product and one
incorrectly used. When a driver knocks down a pedestrian, should
the car
Rick Moen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
And this is _another_ reason why a properly targeted file-based IDS is a
really capital idea -- as is alertness about what is and is not aberrant
system behaviour. I can even make this point in a Debian-relevant way.
All hail to the Debian Project's
Quoting Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
Yup. IDS systems are wonderful. But they do require discipline.
Indeed. I'd still like to see a trial project, to see _if_ a default IDS
setup (Samhain, AIDE, or Prelude-IDS) can be made to be generally useful.
(Yeah, I know: Sooner if you help.)
On Thursday 16 August 2007 15:09, R. W. Rodolico wrote:
Unfortunately, I have to point to some of the
user oriented firewalls you get for windoze (which, to my knowledge, Linux
does not have). When they are installed, the shut down basically
everything incoming, and all but a few standard
Of course is a little bit of philosophy. The whole Debian project is
based on a philosophy of freedom vs rampant marketing and corporate only
dominated computing experience. Granted that many take advantage of this
and make money they would not make if using other for profit OS's.
The original
18 matches
Mail list logo
