On 15 Nov 2016, at 11:37, Bastien Nocera wrote:
As mentioned in the fedora-desktop thread about branding, I don't
like seeing
this sort of randomly generated and nonsensical (and I mean that in
that a string
of hex characters obviously don't *mean* something) shouldn't be
user-visible.
R
- Original Message -
> Further, from a purely technical perspective, I think I've been swayed by
> arguments around the generation of the hostname:
>
> * I'm fine with the lowercase "fedora-" prefix. It makes sense since
> hostnames
> are generally normalized to lower-case in common usa
On 11.11.2016 19:25, Japheth Cleaver wrote:
> On 11/11/2016 9:08 AM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
>> I still believe we should stick to a generic hostname by default,
>> (though I'd rather use "localhost" than "localhost.localdomain" in
>> order to drop the redhatism that "localdomain" is), and make t
On Pá, 2016-11-11 at 13:20 -0500, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> I think this is extreme overkill for something that doesn't need to
> be
> cryptographically sound. It literally just needs to be eight
> characters with a
> sensible random distribution. I considered using some non-reversible
> transform
On 11/14/2016 09:05 AM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Mon, 14.11.16 08:13, Stephen Gallagher (sgall...@redhat.com) wrote:
>
>> One way to address this might be for systemd to provide an API for what
>> Lennart
>> is suggesting and market that as "the correct way to generate a
>> machine-id-deriv
On Mon, 14.11.16 08:13, Stephen Gallagher (sgall...@redhat.com) wrote:
> One way to address this might be for systemd to provide an API for what
> Lennart
> is suggesting and market that as "the correct way to generate a
> machine-id-derived string".
>
> Basically, I see the function looking som
On 11/12/2016 01:14 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 12, 2016 at 11:17:39AM -0500, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
>> On 11 November 2016 at 22:20, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
>> wrote:
>>> On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 01:20:26PM -0500, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>>
I can't think of
> Since I like to use terminal a lot, I would prefer if you keep it short!
>
> If you must include branding I would prefer shorter version of "Fed" or
> "fed" so ideally something like "fed12345".
Shorter hostname is not only useful when typing commands, but anywhere else
where it is used. For e
Since I like to use terminal a lot, I would prefer if you keep it short!
If you must include branding I would prefer shorter version of "Fed" or "fed"
so ideally something like "fed12345".
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsub
On 11/11/16 19:38, Lennart Poettering wrote:
I am pretty sure most things should work just fine, at least in the
base OS. Sure, some higher level services might be broken still, but
I'd suggest to fix that instead of never changing the hostname...
Changing the enrolling code to modify the ma
On 11/11/16 19:23, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
I realize that some of this is coming from my old-school sensibilities, but I
still remember a time when changing the hostname of a running system caused lots
of things to fail, including NFS and sendmail.
Well... many times I forget to set host
On 12/11/16 20:02, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
On Friday, November 11, 2016 11:12:51 AM CST Stephen Gallagher wrote:
3) My original proposal was: change the fallback name to Fedora- by
default, while of course retaining the ability to set it manually.
I think this is terrible, Just because
On Friday, November 11, 2016 11:12:51 AM CST Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> 3) My original proposal was: change the fallback name to Fedora- by
> default, while of course retaining the ability to set it manually.
I think this is terrible, Just because if you are on a system with a small
resou
On 12 November 2016 at 13:14, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 12, 2016 at 11:17:39AM -0500, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
>> On 11 November 2016 at 22:20, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
>> wrote:
>> > On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 01:20:26PM -0500, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>>
>> >> I can't
On Sat, Nov 12, 2016 at 11:17:39AM -0500, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> On 11 November 2016 at 22:20, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
> wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 01:20:26PM -0500, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>
> >> I can't think of a reason why we'd need a cryptographically secure
> >> transfor
On 11 November 2016 at 22:20, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 01:20:26PM -0500, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>> I can't think of a reason why we'd need a cryptographically secure
>> transformation just to generate a random hostname.
>
> We want it cryptographically secure
On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 01:20:26PM -0500, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> On 11/11/2016 12:17 PM, Andrew Lutomirski wrote:
> > /me dons crypto hat.
> >
> > SHA(x || k) has three problems, one of which is bad enough to be an absolute
> > showstopper.
> >
> > 1. Specify *which* SHA. SHA-1 should not be
On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 12:46:43PM -0600, Chris Adams wrote:
> Once upon a time, Andrew Lutomirski said:
> > NetworkManager already has the ability to randomize MAC addresses to keep
> > them from leaking.
>
> "has the ability" is not "on by default". If you want that level of
> anonymity, you h
On 11 November 2016 at 13:23, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>> I still believe we should stick to a generic hostname by default,
>> (though I'd rather use "localhost" than "localhost.localdomain" in
>> order to drop the redhatism that "localdomain" is), and make the IPA
>> client-side enrollment code
Once upon a time, Andrew Lutomirski said:
> NetworkManager already has the ability to randomize MAC addresses to keep
> them from leaking.
"has the ability" is not "on by default". If you want that level of
anonymity, you have to turn it on. Also then changing your hostname,
enabling an option
On Fri, 11.11.16 13:23, Stephen Gallagher (sgall...@redhat.com) wrote:
> > I still believe we should stick to a generic hostname by default,
> > (though I'd rather use "localhost" than "localhost.localdomain" in
> > order to drop the redhatism that "localdomain" is), and make the IPA
> > client-si
On 11/11/2016 9:08 AM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
I still believe we should stick to a generic hostname by default,
(though I'd rather use "localhost" than "localhost.localdomain" in
order to drop the redhatism that "localdomain" is), and make the IPA
client-side enrollment code automatically upda
On 11/11/2016 12:08 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Fri, 11.11.16 11:12, Stephen Gallagher (sgall...@redhat.com) wrote:
>
>> The hostname may always be set manually and the result will (for the vast
>> majority of people) be unique within their environment. This means that if we
>> are concerne
On 11/11/2016 12:17 PM, Andrew Lutomirski wrote:
> /me dons crypto hat.
>
> SHA(x || k) has three problems, one of which is bad enough to be an absolute
> showstopper.
>
> 1. Specify *which* SHA. SHA-1 should not be used for new applications.
>
> 2. Concatenation without some additional propert
On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 8:47 AM, Chris Adams wrote:
> Once upon a time, Stephen Gallagher said:
> > The thread on Fedora Devel revealed some other issues which need to be
> > considered carefully. One of these is that of privacy: for example, the
> DHCP
> > client will send the machine's hostnam
On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 9:08 AM, Lennart Poettering
wrote:
> On Fri, 11.11.16 11:12, Stephen Gallagher (sgall...@redhat.com) wrote:
>
> > The hostname may always be set manually and the result will (for the vast
> > majority of people) be unique within their environment. This means that
> if we
>
On Fri, 11.11.16 11:12, Stephen Gallagher (sgall...@redhat.com) wrote:
> The hostname may always be set manually and the result will (for the vast
> majority of people) be unique within their environment. This means that if we
> are concerned with hostname leakage being a privacy issue, we need to
On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 10:47:47AM -0600, Chris Adams wrote:
> I think concerns about "leaking" a generated hostname are pretty
> minimal. If someone is concerned about that, there are a number of
> other changes they'll probably be making, and they can set a non-default
> hostname in that process
Once upon a time, Stephen Gallagher said:
> The thread on Fedora Devel revealed some other issues which need to be
> considered carefully. One of these is that of privacy: for example, the DHCP
> client will send the machine's hostname as one of the cues to the DHCP server
> for acquiring a lease.
The original thread is getting rather long and I'd like to attempt to summarize
the discussion thus far and see if we can find a way forward from there.
First, some clarifications for preconditions that some people were unaware of
(either on this thread or the ones that popped up on other lists/fo
30 matches
Mail list logo