Josi Christian Rodrmguez wrote:
Hi list,
My system was freeze and when reboot show:
/dev/rsd0a: file system is clean;not checking
/dev/rsd0d: file system is clean;not checking
/dev/rsd0e: file system is clean;not checking
/dev/rsd0g: INCORRECT BLOCK COUNT I=2699655 (20 should be 16)
On Wed, 24 Oct 2007, Brian wrote:
Hi!
I think you are missing the point about x86 hardware being a mess. Theo
made an excellent point about the architecture itself having so many
filthy quirks. If a VM is compromised through any means, that attacker
can now leverage the dirty architecture
On Wed, 24 Oct 2007, Darrin Chandler wrote:
On Wed, Oct 24, 2007 at 05:44:37PM -0500, L. V. Lammert wrote:
At 05:27 PM 10/24/2007 -0500, Tony Abernethy wrote:
L. V. Lammert wrote:
gibberish
Wow, such intelligence Now we get crap instead of ostrich logic.
Sheesh.
Actually,
On Wed, 24 Oct 2007, Jeremy Huiskamp wrote:
On 24-Oct-07, at 5:59 PM, L. V. Lammert wrote:
At 03:31 PM 10/24/2007 -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:
You must be more qualified with regards to the actual code than I am
because I flat out don't believe this at all.
Believe what? OBSD is secure?
On 10/24/07, Henning Brauer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* Darren Spruell [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-10-24 21:48]:
Remember back 10-ish years ago when VLANs were being touted as the
ultimate network segmentation technology by marketers of managed
switches? And now everyone hopefully realizes that
On 10/24/07, L. V. Lammert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sorry, it's YOU that missed the point! I never said or made any comparison
to physical machines - the entirety of that I said is:
Running services/application domains in VMs increases security. As I
said in a previous email, only an idiot
L. V. Lammert wrote:
On Wed, 24 Oct 2007, Brian wrote:
Hi!
I think you are missing the point about x86 hardware being a mess. Theo
made an excellent point about the architecture itself having so many
filthy quirks. If a VM is compromised through any means, that attacker
can now leverage
L. V. Lammert wrote:
The more discrete the security model (i.e. File/Print users are not
valid on the httpd server) the better.
There's something I think you don't see here. Let's assume, for a
moment, that you have a VM host running two guests, one OpenBSD, one
Windows.
Now, the OpenBSD
On Oct 24, 2007, at 9:20 PM, L. V. Lammert wrote:
On Wed, 24 Oct 2007, Darrin Chandler wrote:
Looking at what you've written, you seem to consider OpenBSD to be
pretty secure. By extension, let's assume the developers, and Theo in
particular, have some darned good knowledge about security and
The entire point is this: You cannot increase security by putting more
things on one physical server. You can run your different 'Application
Domains' on different physical servers. That is much closer to security
than through obscurity.
And when physical servers cost less than some vmware
On Wed, 24 Oct 2007, L. V. Lammert wrote:
I still stand by my original statement. Running application 'domains' in
VMs instead of on a single server increases security.
It no worse security-wise to run applications on VMs rather than on the
one OS, but that isn't the only choice - is it?
You
On Wed, Oct 24, 2007 at 08:20:59PM -0500, L. V. Lammert wrote:
On Wed, 24 Oct 2007, Darrin Chandler wrote:
On Wed, Oct 24, 2007 at 05:44:37PM -0500, L. V. Lammert wrote:
At 05:27 PM 10/24/2007 -0500, Tony Abernethy wrote:
L. V. Lammert wrote:
gibberish
Wow, such intelligence
On Wed, 24 Oct 2007, Brian wrote:
All of the theoretical attack vectors are exactly that: theoretical.
But by adding complex layers does not guarantee any increase in security.
They aren't theoretical, they have been demonstrated. Read the paper:
http://taviso.decsystem.org/virtsec.pdf
On Wed, Oct 24, 2007 at 08:55:14PM -0400, Nick Holland wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have a new Dell Optiplex 745 with an Intel Core 2 Duo.
this system completed the install. Now on boot it hangs after:
wskbd1: connecting to wsdisplay0
the only issue I had during install was
only an idiot would think that separatey
physical machines would NOT increase security
Many IBM PCs vs IBM mainframe
Many mailboxes vs Fort Knox.
Many avenues of attack vs few.
People learn to count in kindergarden.
thanks for the response. I'll give that a read, and a try.
where are you getting 4.2? the web site only shows 4.1 as being released.
metajunkie
On 10/24/07, Nick Holland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
all,
I'm happy to read whatever I need to, in order to get this
Make sure you have restarted Firefox after making changes to
/etc/resolv.conf. Specifically, the application-level DNS cache will
contain old data if you have not restarted it. This bit me for 3
minutes straight after needing to redirect an address.
Karel Kulhavy wrote:
I want to make my OS
On Wed, Oct 24, 2007 at 12:32:19PM -0600, Daniel Melameth wrote:
I have, what appears to be, v1 of this card, but I get the following from
dmesg--even when booting from the latest snapshot of cd42.iso:
Intersil, ISL3890, -, - (manufacturer 0xb, product 0x3890) Intersil Prism
GT/Duette
On Wed, Oct 24, 2007 at 11:46:34PM -0400, Brian wrote:
Make sure you have restarted Firefox after making changes to
/etc/resolv.conf. Specifically, the application-level DNS cache will
contain old data if you have not restarted it. This bit me for 3
minutes straight after needing to redirect
On 10/24/07, L. V. Lammert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have no clue what you're trying to say??? The original comment was the
the number of vulnerabilities is a inverse measure of the security risk
associated with a given OS.
Please stop feeding this trolling. LV you should know better --
if it
On 10/24/07, L. V. Lammert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Virtualization provides near absolute security - DOM0 is not visible to
the user at all, only passing network traffic and handling kernel calls.
The security comes about in that each DOMU is totally isolated from the
the others, while the
On 10/24/07, Jonathan Gray [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Oct 24, 2007 at 12:32:19PM -0600, Daniel Melameth wrote:
I have, what appears to be, v1 of this card, but I get the following from
dmesg--even when booting from the latest snapshot of cd42.iso:
Intersil, ISL3890, -, -
101 - 122 of 122 matches
Mail list logo
