Richard Pieri wrote:
The prototype is 512M and the target spec is 1GB.
According to the Ubiquiti data sheet:
http://www.ubnt.com/downloads/datasheets/edgemax/EdgeRouter_DS.pdf
The EdgeRouter Lite (the $100 model) only has 512 MB RAM. (Powered by a
Dual-Core 500 MHz, MIPS64 with Hardware
From: discuss-bounces+blu=nedharvey@blu.org [mailto:discuss-
bounces+blu=nedharvey@blu.org] On Behalf Of Rich Braun
Following a recent burglary, in which a laptop was stolen, I want to go
through my systems and protect them with full-disk encryption.
Based on your post, it sounds
On 9/30/2014 5:36 AM, Tom Metro wrote:
The EdgeRouter Lite (the $100 model) only has 512 MB RAM. (Powered by a
Dual-Core 500 MHz, MIPS64 with Hardware Acceleration for Packet
Processing.)
And as you noted, ER Lite does not do DPI which means it has more RAM
available to handle active
On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 05:36:26AM -0400, Tom Metro wrote:
If they can deliver a 2-core, 1 GHz CPU w/1 GB RAM appliance for $150,
that'll be a good deal. They say in their FAQ, Hobbyists and hackers
wishing to modify the iGuardian software to use the hardware platform
for other purposes are
On 9/30/2014 6:39 PM, Tom Metro wrote:
Both are open platforms so you could configure either to have or not
have DPI.
Not entirely true. Ubiquiti's hardware is pretty open but their OS is
proprietary and I have no idea how stable it would be after coercing it
to do something unsupported.
Richard Pieri wrote:
Ubiquiti's...OS is proprietary...
It's a Debian fork, 2-steps removed. (Fork of a fork.)
Similarly iGuardian is packaging OpenWRT, which may or may not qualify
as a fork. It might in the sense that they probably bundle binary blobs
to support their hardware, which you are
On 9/30/2014 8:28 PM, Tom Metro wrote:
Richard Pieri wrote:
Ubiquiti's...OS is proprietary...
It's a Debian fork, 2-steps removed. (Fork of a fork.)
I could have sworn I saw Ubiquiti's literature use the word
proprietary in there somewhere. Yep, it's in the packet acceleration
chunk.
On 9/30/2014 9:38 AM, Edward Ned Harvey (blu) wrote:
In linux, I'm not aware of any product that does whole disk encryption without
needing a power-on password. In windows, Bitlocker uses the TPM to ensure the
OS gets booted untampered, and then your user logon password and OS security
are
I assume most readers of this list are already well familiar with the
Bash bug known as Shellshock by now. The general tech press has raised
alarms about it, but they've generally done a rather poor job of
explaining the actual ways in which the bug could be exploited remotely.
Here are a few
Also...
Repository of Shellshock Proof of Concept Code
https://github.com/mubix/shellshocker-pocs
-Tom
--
Tom Metro
The Perl Shop, Newton, MA, USA
Predictable On-demand Perl Consulting.
http://www.theperlshop.com/
___
Discuss mailing list
Speaking of full disk encryption, TrueCrypt has been forked...
-Tom
CipherShed: A replacement for TrueCrypt
http://www.net-security.org/secworld.php?id=17392
While the Open Crypt Audit Project, headed by cryptographer Matthew
Green and Kenneth White, Principal Scientist at Social
I take exception to the Lisp.org quote.
Yes, it's a fair point that Gnu project is older than either Apache or
Linux, but that doesn't exempt Bash from criticism. (And if this bug
is only 20 years old as claimed, being when ENV function overrides
were invented, it's maybe a year older than
12 matches
Mail list logo
