Re: [eug-lug]I feel Bourne Again
Quoth Max Lemieux, on Thu, 29 Jan 2004 12:06:16 -0800: ~/.bashrc ~/.bash_profile There is also a global file on most installations: /etc/bashrc, in case you want to change the shell for all users. --Jason Van Cleve -- In 2010, Microsoft Windows will be a quantum processing emulation layer for a 128-bit mod of a 64-bit hack of a 32-bit patch to a 16-bit GUI for an 8-bit operating system written for a 4-bit processor by a 2-bit company that can't stand 1 bit of competition. ___ EuG-LUG mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.efn.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/eug-lug
Re: [eug-lug]I feel Bourne Again
Many have /etc/profile as well, not to be missed if it is there. Ben On Fri, 30 Jan 2004 00:24:40 -0800 Jason Van Cleve [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | Quoth Max Lemieux, on Thu, 29 Jan 2004 12:06:16 -0800: | | ~/.bashrc | ~/.bash_profile | | There is also a global file on most installations: /etc/bashrc, in case | you want to change the shell for all users. | | --Jason Van Cleve ___ EuG-LUG mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.efn.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/eug-lug
RE: [eug-lug]Help the out-of-towner
Thanks for the tip on Graybar, Norvac can be a mixed bag: hard to find items, but pricey. I shopped at a few places not worth mentioning... and I did buy from Stan while the PC training center was the ELUG hangout. I used to use VOC: they are price competitive, but I found the owner (lead tech?) to be brusque and sometimes you want feel they are in your corner. I questioned the integrity of some MoBo's and cards, so I stopped buying. I have been using PC Parts express. No sign of recognition on the mention of Linux, but price competitive. I would like to give Mr O and Computer Base a try. I am still looking for that PIII socket 370. I've cruzing Ebay, but maybe we could make a deal. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Hal Pomeranz Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2004 12:26 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [eug-lug]Help the out-of-towner So what's the best store in the area for finding random computer-related cabling, drives, enclosures, motherboards, PCI cards, memory, software, etc. when I'm in a hurry and don't want to wait for an on-line order to ship? I could give you a map of such places in the Bay Area, but I have no idea when it comes to Eugene. Help me Obi-Wan EUG-LUG! You're my only hope! -- Hal Pomeranz, Founder/CEO Deer Run Associates [EMAIL PROTECTED] Network Connectivity and Security, Systems Management, Training ___ EuG-LUG mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.efn.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/eug-lug ___ EuG-LUG mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.efn.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/eug-lug
Re: [eug-lug]a few questions (remote Xwindows)
So, if I ssh into a system and have X-forwarding for the session, anything including my initial [bash or other] shell could be logging my local keystrokes, even in other windows? (assuming the shell binay was modified to log such events) They can only get X events, though, so they don't get keystrokes that go to a non-X session like one of the text terminals -- is that correct? If this is true, I think we'll all be more wary of logging in to others' systems... I'm also curious about what signals are remotely visible when the local X system, being ssh'ed *from*, is a cygwin/X system. Furthermore, what about a cygwin/X running inside wine or xmware? Is the sniffing potential limited to cygwin's X session, or would it inherit access through the hosting OS's desktop (in the caee of cygwin on wine or vmware)? ever-so-curious, Ben On Thu, 29 Jan 2004 22:02:06 -0800 Bob Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | Ben Barrett wrote: | | 1. I never realized that 'xkill' could pass the appropriate signals | through a remote Xwindows connection, which in my case was | SSH-tunnelled. If anyone has explored this or knows more, I'm very | curious, about the security implications, for instance; what can you | tell me? Example: you log your buddy into their remote account as | they borrow your system momentarily, they do their stuff, but could | easily (accidentally or otherwise) kill anything on your desktop, or | possibly the entire session(?). I know they could close anything, | having physical access, but I feel like I'm not getting the whole | picture. | | X is a network-transparent window system. That means that it doesn't | matter whether there is a network between the client and the server. | The client has exactly the same privileges and capabilities in either | case. There is at least one exception in the X11 protocol, the one | that I can remember is that the xhost command only works through a | local connection. But you can do nearly everything remotely that you | can do locally. Linux Terminal Servers rely on that. | | Some of the things a client (any client) can do include: reading any | part of the screen or offscreen pixmaps, reading or changing any | window's properties, and reading events from the mouse and keyboard | (e.g., keystroke logging). | | I'm sure you can see what the security implications are -- if you're | going to run an X client on a host, your workstation, and other hosts | that also run X clients on it, are no more secure than that host. | (thanks Bob!!) ___ EuG-LUG mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.efn.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/eug-lug
[eug-lug]EUGLUG FreeBSD users?
Happy Friday all: Are there many FreeBSD users on the list? I had experience with FreeBSD many moons ago, and have pretty much only dealt whith Open on the BSD side of things for the last 3 or 4 years (and OS X for the last year or so). Having read through the recent BSD vs. Linux or BSD for Linux Users rant at: http://www.over-yonder.net/~fullermd/rants/bsd4linux/bsd4linux1.php there are several things that have reminded me about how nice FreeBSD is to use. Does anyone have any personal opinions on using FreeBSD as a primary OS? Or, any thoughts on using OpenBSD vs. FreeBSD? I am most interested in things from a desktop perspective, though any thoughts are appreciated. Thanks, Jason __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it! http://webhosting.yahoo.com/ps/sb/ ___ EuG-LUG mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.efn.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/eug-lug
Re: [eug-lug]I feel Bourne Again
Yeah, I don't swing that way either. Yeah, I don't swing that way, either, but that has nothing to do with this list or the bash shell. More specifically, I don't bash those who do swing that way On Thu, 29 Jan 2004 16:57:53 -0800 Max wrote: | And here I thought you were referring to a Baptist revival meeting... | -Max | | Ben B wrote: | | Well I should clarify, that is a gross idea to me. I am admittedly | hetero, and don't want to FEEL Mr. Bourne. My joke was to take you | literally = ) | | | On Thu, 29 Jan 2004 19:44:21 -0500 (EST) | Bill E wrote: | | | | Does anyone get the joke? Ha Ha Ha. | | | | That's gross!!! | | | | Gross? What on earth. You know the bash shell. its the bourn again | | (BA)sh shell. It is the csh only bourn again. The bourn shell, more | | known as the c shell, was written by Charles(?) Bourne, Mr. Borne, I | | don't remember his 1st name... How is that gross? ___ EuG-LUG mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.efn.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/eug-lug ___ EuG-LUG mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.efn.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/eug-lug
Re: [eug-lug]a few questions (remote Xwindows)
So, if I ssh into a system and have X-forwarding for the session, anything including my initial [bash or other] shell could be logging my local keystrokes, even in other windows? (assuming the shell binay was modified to log such events) Remember that if you log into a remote system, your local keystrokes aren't really local-- they typically go out to the remote system and are echoed back inside of your login window. So if an attacker has control of the remote system, they can see all of your interactions with that machine. Now when you add X forwarding on top of that, you've essentially created one end of a conduit that a remote attacker on the system could use to access the X server on your local box. It's unfortunate, but X Windows authentication is relatively trivial (an attacker with root on the remote system can easily steal your MIT magic cookie authenticator to get access) and is basically an all or nothing privilege model. Once the attacker has the right authentication credentials, they can use a tool like xkey (grab keystrokes) or xwatch/xmon (grabs the video display) to see what's happening on your local X desktop. On a Unix machine, that's death because _everything_ is going through the X server on your local machine (assuming you're operating under the GUI and not the text console). On a Windows box, it's just the stuff you do in whatever third-party X desktop you're using, not the stuff that's happening in the normal Windows desktop environment. This all sounds very scary, but it's important to point out that X forwarding over SSH is vastly more secure than the normal remote X protocol that happens on 6000/tcp. The normal X remote protocol has all of the authentication problems described above PLUS it happens in clear text on the network, which means you can watch the network from some other system with something like Der Mouse's X Connection Monitor and passively sniff everything that's going on between the two machines. If this is true, I think we'll all be more wary of logging in to others' systems... Of course you should be-- and it's not just because of the stuff we're talking about here. When you set up an account on somebody else's machine, do you use the same password you use at work or on your personal machines? Do you create SSH identity certificates (or worse, set up .rhosts-style trust relationships) on that system for logging into other machines? Do you jump from the untrusted remote system to other devices on the network (allowing the owner of the untrusted system to monitor your remote login and steal passwords and other information)? Do you trust their DNS configuration to give correct info? Do you trust the OS binaries not to be trojan horses that are doing other nefarious and malicious things? You can't be too paranoid about this stuff, IMHO. -- Hal Pomeranz, Founder/CEO Deer Run Associates [EMAIL PROTECTED] Network Connectivity and Security, Systems Management, Training ___ EuG-LUG mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.efn.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/eug-lug
Re: [eug-lug]a few questions (media PC: via or intel)
Right on. I'm looking at the Nemeniah MII's that just came out, but your statements confirm my latest thoughts that the Via mobo will be more of a plaything, to test out its capabilities and the feasibility of it as a media PC... I'm leaning toward the SS51G or an XPC system (either with a P4) as a system which I *know* can handle it. Thanks Mr. O! Ben PS - also curious about the on-board crypto functions of the latest via chipsets; I've heard they have linux support for that. Finally: a solid built-in /dev/random ?? I was tired of training my webcam on vapor from dry ice, clouds, fountains, and other local sources of quasi-entropy. = ) On Thu, 29 Jan 2004 22:32:44 -0800 (PST) Mr O [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | The Nehemiah M1 has been reported to handle decoding quite | well especially with mplayer. I haven't had a whole lot of time | to play with mine. On the other hand, the Shuttle SS51G is well | below $200 now so building a slightly more powerful system is | going cost you probably not more than another $100. | Shuttle advantage: more flexible component choice and growth | capability. | Via Mini-ITX: Lower power consumption, ability to integrate a | tiny box that makes quite a bit less noise. | | Brought to you by someone who has both ;) | | Mr O. | | | | --- Bob Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | Ben Barrett wrote: | | 3. How do you (subjectively) weigh the benefits of a | mini-itx system for a | home entertainment PC, versus a mini-P4? Obviously, the P4 | sucks more power | and can have far more processing power -- and can also be | made nearly as | quiet. The mobo/cpu combo's I'm looking at cost about the | same... I'm just | looking for the variety of people's opinions here, offer | whatever you care | to. | | Video comes in many formats. I doubt a VIA CPU can handle | realtime | decompression of most of those formats. And future codecs | will be | more compute intensive. If you're building a single-purpose | box that | only uses MPEG compression, and you can get the hardware MPEG | decoder | to fly, the VIA boards might be suitable. | ___ EuG-LUG mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.efn.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/eug-lug
Re: [eug-lug]EUGLUG FreeBSD users?
On Fri, Jan 30, 2004 at 10:16:56AM -0800, Jason wrote: Happy Friday all: Are there many FreeBSD users on the list? I had experience with FreeBSD many moons ago, and have pretty much only dealt whith Open on the BSD side of things for the last 3 or 4 years (and OS X for the last year or so). Having read through the recent BSD vs. Linux or BSD for Linux Users rant at: http://www.over-yonder.net/~fullermd/rants/bsd4linux/bsd4linux1.php there are several things that have reminded me about how nice FreeBSD is to use. Does anyone have any personal opinions on using FreeBSD as a primary OS? Or, any thoughts on using OpenBSD vs. FreeBSD? I am most interested in things from a desktop perspective, though any thoughts are appreciated. I have been using OpenBSD as my primary OS for a couple years. In the last week or so I've installed Net and Free BSD (concurrently) on my Tecra 8000. I think FreeBSD offers more features for a desktop. For example FreeBSD has ALSA sound drivers, and more hardware drivers in general. But I found it a little more difficult to configure X and my PCMCIA card doesn't work as smoothly under Free as it does under Net or Open. I think FreeBSD is more difficult to maintain than Net or Open ... more abstract configuration, doesn't have a manpage every driver, etc. FreeBSD is more open to using GPL sources, if that's of any consequence to you. I haven't had a good initial reaction to FreeBSD's ports. It seems there is a mechanism to call su to install the software, but it doesn't always get called before the port tries to install, and make dies. Very annoying, since I've never even see that on OpenBSD. Of course FreeBSD has more ports. Personally, I think if I really need some feature that's not in Open or Net, then I'd probably just use Linux, since it has even more desktop features and even more software ready to run. That being said, I still use OpenBSD as my primary OS, even for desktops. Heck, I even have transcode and mjpegtools running on my OpenBSD machines. I just don't want to give up the basic simplicity of OpenBSD administration. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ EuG-LUG mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.efn.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/eug-lug
Re: [eug-lug]Help the out-of-towner
On Thu, Jan 29, 2004 at 01:40:50PM -0800, Ben Barrett wrote: Can also suggest Graybar for cables and networking tools (ends/crimpers, etc), although they claim to be wholesalers, I think they'd happily take your money. I've found them to be more helpful and also cheaper on a lot of things, than Norvac. Graybar and Norvac are both out west 11th, Graybar is past Fred Meyers. Also out that way is VOS, Virtual Office Systems, which some here may poo-poo, but they've been providing many stable PCs to my crew lately, and are pretty responsive to problems and returns and the like, when they do arise. The only complaint *I* have with them is that they seem to like to zip-tie the heck out of the cabling, which can pose problems for IDE cables fortunately it hasn't yet! VOS sells the PC systems through the UO bookstore, but is located out west 11th, between Graybar and Norvac IIRC, in the same little shopping center as a Radio Shack, near the DMV. It's probably okay to zip-tie and IDE cable, really. I used to do an awful lot of that myself just for the sake of trying to get airflow around components. Not everyone can have the airflow design of a Mac. ;) ___ EuG-LUG mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.efn.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/eug-lug
Re: [eug-lug]a few questions
On Thu, Jan 29, 2004 at 10:02:06PM -0800, Bob Miller wrote: Video comes in many formats. I doubt a VIA CPU can handle realtime decompression of most of those formats. And future codecs will be more compute intensive. If you're building a single-purpose box that only uses MPEG compression, and you can get the hardware MPEG decoder to fly, the VIA boards might be suitable. I'd disagree to some extent. An intel chip of the 266 MHz starting point can usually handle MPEG-2 decompression in real-time without dropping frames if that's all it's doing. A 366 MHz processor in a laptop can do MPEG in Linux at least without hardware help, though in some other evil OS there is help from the hardware on this particular notebook. A VIA chip around 900MHz or so should be more than adequate for MPEG video. It should do DivX fine as well. More complex formats (which nobody is seriously using at this point in time) are out, but unless there is a major compression breakthrough, DivX video is currently about as good as it gets for quality and compression ratio. Of course, with hardware decoders, a dinky 50 MHz processor is almost fast enough to be useful for some practical purpose. Like presenting a simple GUI to the user, perhaps. But I wouldn't expect you'd know much about that, right? =) ___ EuG-LUG mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.efn.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/eug-lug
[eug-lug]Re: EUGLUG FreeBSD users?
I've been using NetBSD for about 3 years, mostly on Sparc. It's been by primary desktop (sparc 5, 170MHz) for about the last 18 months and for the most part I'm pretty content with it. By sticking with lightweight apps (both command-line and GUI) I've found I can get by just fine with what is obviously pretty slow hardware by today's standards. I only fire up the Windoze box now for printing* or viewing web stuff that needs all sorts of plug-ins. One of these days we'll get a new computer - probably a Mac. * I'm currently trying to master the black art of Unix printing... Look for a printcap/gs filter post from me very soon! ;) -Beaker Are there many FreeBSD users on the list? I had experience with FreeBSD many moons ago, and have pretty much only dealt whith Open on the BSD side of things for the last 3 or 4 years (and OS X for the last year or so). -- [ SiMpLe MaChInEs ] -- gopher://beaker.mdns.org or (via proxy) http://gopher.floodgap.com/gopher/gw.lite?gopher://beaker.mdns.org:70/1 ___ EuG-LUG mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.efn.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/eug-lug
Re: [eug-lug]a few questions (remote Xwindows)
Hal Pomeranz wrote: The normal X remote protocol has all of the authentication problems described above PLUS it happens in clear text on the network, which means you can watch the network from some other system with something like Der Mouse's X Connection Monitor and passively sniff everything that's going on between the two machines. I never heard of Der Mouse's X Connection Monitor. Would it be a useful debugging tool if I were trying to debug the interaction between an X client and server? -- Bob Miller Kbob kbobsoft software consulting http://kbobsoft.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ EuG-LUG mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.efn.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/eug-lug
Re: [eug-lug]a few questions (remote Xwindows)
The normal X remote protocol has all of the authentication problems described above PLUS it happens in clear text on the network, which means you can watch the network from some other system with something like Der Mouse's X Connection Monitor and passively sniff everything that's going on between the two machines. I never heard of Der Mouse's X Connection Monitor. Would it be a useful debugging tool if I were trying to debug the interaction between an X client and server? To be honest, I haven't used Der Mouse's tool much myself. It was demonstrated to me as a way of sniffing say a remote xterm session. So I doubt it would be much good for what you suggest, since it probably assumes a well-formed sequence of X events that it can monitor. Guess you'll have to keep using that hex output from tcpdump... :-) -- Hal Pomeranz, Founder/CEO Deer Run Associates [EMAIL PROTECTED] Network Connectivity and Security, Systems Management, Training ___ EuG-LUG mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.efn.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/eug-lug
Re: [eug-lug]Re: EUGLUG FreeBSD users?
On Fri, Jan 30, 2004 at 01:25:46PM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've been using NetBSD for about 3 years, mostly on Sparc. It's been by primary desktop (sparc 5, 170MHz) for about the last 18 months and for the most part I'm pretty content with it. By sticking with lightweight apps (both command-line and GUI) I've found I can get by just fine with what is obviously pretty slow hardware by today's standards. I forgot to give my impressions of NetBSD earlier. I like it. It supports more hardware than OpenBSD. For example, my toshiba IR controller is supported. It's not much more complicated to maintain than OpenBSD, for example, the IR and my pcmcia ethernet card just worked, and I was able to roll my own install CD, although it wouldn't boot right because the installer takes two floppies or a 2.88MB image, which my laptop won't boot for any OS. I guess I could have booted a floppy and a CD, but that's another issue ;/ It took me a little while to figure out pkgsrc (/usr/pkg, seemingly not much documentation?). Jason, if you like OpenBSD, but want more hardware support for your desktop needs, why not try out NetBSD? Oh, does anyone here run NetBSD-current? -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ EuG-LUG mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.efn.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/eug-lug
RE: [eug-lug]Help the out-of-towner
It goes a little like this. As a shop we limit ourselves to a certain number of vendors otherwise they all call begging for more business. So if our few vendors don't have an older part such as P3 boards (though we can often still get Tyan dual CPU boards) then we encourage the buyer to check online. We often do our best to match prices online. We do have a storefront to maintain and I have to pay my bills. Our prices are often quoted as the retail price. We don't choose to carry cheap components and find that if something has a higher than acceptable return rate (in our case that often equates to if more than two of said item fails within 4 to 6 weeks use we quit carrying said product. Lots of cheap hardware works fine under linux. Try Windows XP on a lot of that cheap crap and see how well your machine runs with the average user ;). Also why we limit ourselve on the amount of AMD we deal with. Far too many problems in the long run. A machine here or there for the knowledgeable is generally harmless but we don't push AMD into the hands of a beginner. VOS has the advantage of higher foot traffic, PCParts just carries *ahem* affordable stuff and you've seen that storefront. Lastly, I know alot of what works well with linux. So.. to that avail I welcome your comments, suggestions, or complaints. The geek with too many toys, Mr O. a.k.a [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- baggab [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have been using PC Parts express. No sign of recognition on the mention of Linux, but price competitive. I would like to give Mr O and Computer Base a try. I am still looking for that PIII socket 370. I've cruzing Ebay, but maybe we could make a deal. __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it! http://webhosting.yahoo.com/ps/sb/ ___ EuG-LUG mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.efn.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/eug-lug
[eug-lug]THE REBEL ALLIANCE
http://www.wweek.com/story.php?story=4764 ___ EuG-LUG mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.efn.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/eug-lug
