Re: [SLUG] Re: Weird login behaviour

[Michael Lake]

O Plameras wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 10:09:34 +1000, QuantumG
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I dunno if anyone else has said this or not, but /dev/kmem and the joy
of kernel exploits can allow an attacker to taint a kernel in ways that
you simply cannot detect.  Not to mention the fact that kernel modules
Actually it was mentioned during the current thread, with a mention of 
articles
which demonstrate how it's done, if I remember correctly.
But your message made me wonder - is it practical to disable creation of
/dev/kmem?
Some good insights about /dev/kmem here from a hacker:
http://jclemens.org/knark/creed_interview1.html
And this one is interesting too, covers 2.4 kernels and not some old 2.0 
exploits. It also has another reference to kmem in the references list.
http://www.phrack.org/phrack/61/p61-0x0a_Infecting_Loadable_Kernel_Modules.txt
I am truly amazed what these guys can do.

Mike
--
Michael Lake
Chemistry, Materials & Forensic Science, UTS
Ph: 9514 1725 Fx: 9514 1460
[pls ignore idiot lawyer's msg below]

--
UTS CRICOS Provider Code:  00099F
DISCLAIMER: This email message and any accompanying attachments may contain
confidential information.  If you are not the intended recipient, do not
read, use, disseminate, distribute or copy this message or attachments.  If
you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately
and delete this message. Any views expressed in this message are those of the
individual sender, except where the sender expressly, and with authority,
states them to be the views the University of Technology Sydney. Before
opening any attachments, please check them for viruses and defects.
--
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html

Re: [SLUG] Re: Weird login behaviour

[O Plameras]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 10:09:34 +1000, QuantumG
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
 

I dunno if anyone else has said this or not, but /dev/kmem and the joy
of kernel exploits can allow an attacker to taint a kernel in ways that
you simply cannot detect.  Not to mention the fact that kernel modules
   

Actually it was mentioned during the current thread, with a mention of 
articles
which demonstrate how it's done, if I remember correctly.
But your message made me wonder - is it practical to disable creation of
/dev/kmem?
 

Some good insights about /dev/kmem here from a hacker:
http://jclemens.org/knark/creed_interview1.html
O Plameras
--
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html

Re: [SLUG] Stupidest law of the year candidate!

[Grant Parnell]

On Thu, 24 Feb 2005, Marek Wawrzyczny wrote:

> On Thu, 24 Feb 2005 10:15, Benno wrote:
> > On Thu Feb 24, 2005 at 10:08:33 +1100, DaZZa wrote:
> > >We may as well shut down the internet now.
> > >
> > >http://www.smh.com.au/news/Breaking/ISPs-forced-to-join-child-porn-crackdo
> > >wn/2005/02/23/1109046951674.html
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >If you don't have one already, login with
> > >
> > >username: vanitas
> > >password: vain
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >Basically, it makes Australian ISP's liable for $55000 fines if their
> > >service can be USED to access child pornography and they don't report it
> > >to the federal police.
> > >
> > >Furrfu! If I was running an ISP, I'd just report the entire internet and
> > >be done with it. *Any* internet connection can be used to access child
> > >porn if you know where to look. As abhorrent as I find the concept of
> > >child pornography, this just has to be the stupidest law of the year. You
> > >might as well fine Telstra or Optus because child pornographers can talk
> > >to each other, if they know the right number!
> >
> > If you read further it doesn't seem as bad. I think the article is probably
> > poorly written. Other new sources I've heard (JJJ radio), suggests that it
> > if they are made aware of a particular site carrying child-porn, and do not
> > restrict access to that.
> >
> > Of course, there is a bit of a problem here, how can they check it? Since
> > that is also illegal. And who would make them aware of the child porn?
> > Because then you would have had to access the porn in the first place. So
> > yeah, OK, it is stupid ;)
> >
> > Benno
> 
> Perhaps the law should be amended to include:
> 
> "All ISPs should employ masses of trained monkeys that scour the net in 
> search 
> of illegal sites, and add them to the list... and if monkeys are unavailable, 
> replace them with blindfolded employees..."
> 
> Seriously though, who are they kidding?
> 
> It'll just force those fiends to use encrypted, password protected sites, 
> it'll make them more difficult to find and weed out. Those knee jerk 
> reactions are just plain stupid, especially when the policy makers have no 
> understanding of the technologies involved.

Nowhere in the original article did it actually say they had to prevent
access, just report it to the AFP. In this way the AFP can monitor it and
at least try to catch the people involved at each end. The phrase "It will 
also be a federal offence, carrying a penalty of 10 years' jail, for a 
person to use the internet to access, transmit or make available child 
pornography or child abuse material." refers to a person, not things like 
routers & proxies.

 -- 
--
** ROOM FOR RENT $120pw (neg) near Newington Shops 525/401 buses **
Electronic Hobbyist, Former Arcadia BBS nut, Occasional nudist, 
Linux Guru, SLUG Secretary, AUUG and Linux Australia member, Sydney 
Flashmobber, Tenpin Bowler, BMX rider, Walker, Raver & rave music 
lover, Big kid that refuses to grow up. I'd make a good family pet, 
take me home today!
Some people actually read these things it seems.

-- 
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html

Re: [SLUG] Re: Lindsay's nomination

[Robert Collins]

On Tue, 2005-03-01 at 12:03 +1100, Elliott-Brennan wrote:
>I hope this helps to dispel any concerns held by SLUG members regarding 
>the election of a person under the age of 18 years.


I don't think anyone in the current committee has any concerns at this
point.. I'm sure they jump on me if they do :).

Anyway, I have him down for the election.

Cheers,
Rob

-- 
GPG key available at: .


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- 
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html

[SLUG] [sydpug] Reminder: March Sydpug Tonight!

[Gavin Sherry]

Hi all,

Just a reminder that the Sydney PostgreSQL Users Group will be meeting
tonight.

You can find more details here:

http://pugs.postgresql.org/sydpug/archives/26.html

Thanks

Gavin

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
-- 
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html

Re: [SLUG] Re: Weird login behaviour

[QuantumG]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But your message made me wonder - is it practical to disable creation of
/dev/kmem?
 

Sure is.
What other practical ways have we got to avoid attacks through it?
SE Linux? GRSecurity?
 

Well, the year I gave up being a security consultant was the same year 
that I had a frank discussion with some average hacker/cracker types 
over a beer.  I was living in Melbourne at the time and these lads all 
told me in no uncertain terms that I was a fossil.  These guys told me 
something that made me rethink the whole concept of unix security: go 
for the kernel exploit.  Every one of them had their own personal, 
never-announced-to-the-public bug in the linux kernel that they would 
use to run arbitary code.

The C language is just so full of pitfalls and traps that it is next to 
impossible to write secure code in it.  You can do it obviously (look at 
OpenBSD) but it requires so much discipline and arcane knowledge that 
most programmers simply can't write secure code.

The number of people reporting exploitable bugs in software has dropped 
in the last 5 years.  It's not because the software has gotten better.  
It's because the kind of people who used to see finding these bugs as a 
challenge that would earn them respect and admiration have been vilified 
by the security companies that see finding these bugs as something their 
employees should be doing (to earn their company respect and 
admiration).  These people didn't just stop looking for these bugs, they 
just stopped reporting them in official forums.  Instead, they sit on 
irc and tell the "bad guys" all the bugs they find.  Of course, there 
are the kind of people (like me) who just found the shear number of bugs 
available to be found as a turn off to the whole endevour.  I mean, how 
fun is it to search for something you know you're going to find?

So unfortunately, I have no doubt that even your average script kiddie 
has their own personal kernel exploit that will likely never be fixed.  
As my signature on Slashdot says:

   /Do we smell nothing of the security decomposition? Security is 
dead. Security remains dead and we have killed it.

Trent
/
--
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html

[SLUG] Re: Lindsay's nomination

[Elliott-Brennan]

Hi all,
1. I'm not a financial member of SLUG (thus can't vote)
2. I have met Lindsay and agree with everyone's comments about his 
competence and abilities (he's also a nice guy :)).

3. I work in the internal investigations unit of a large NSW government 
department.

4. We supervise the licence conditions of thousands of financial and 
service agreements around the state (many are required by the terms of 
their agreement to of have a committee).

5. I have had involvement with agencies that have had youth committees.
6. I have sought the opinion of a solicitor that works with me who 
stated that there is no particular reason that Lindsay cannot be elected 
as a committee member.

7. I tend to agree with Robert Thorsby -  who I have not met and don't 
know :)

8. This information was not paid for by anyone and the use of firearms 
and other means of causing bodily harm was not discussed openly by any 
of the persons who visited my home at 3am this morning :))

I hope this helps to dispel any concerns held by SLUG members regarding 
the election of a person under the age of 18 years.

--
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html

Re: [SLUG] Re: Weird login behaviour

[amos]

On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 10:09:34 +1000, QuantumG
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I dunno if anyone else has said this or not, but /dev/kmem and the joy
> of kernel exploits can allow an attacker to taint a kernel in ways that
> you simply cannot detect.  Not to mention the fact that kernel modules

Actually it was mentioned during the current thread, with a mention of articles
which demonstrate how it's done, if I remember correctly.

But your message made me wonder - is it practical to disable creation of
/dev/kmem?
What other practical ways have we got to avoid attacks through it?
SE Linux? GRSecurity?

Cheers,

--Amos
-- 
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html

Re: [SLUG] Re: Nomination: Lindsay Holmwood

[Ken Wilson]

best bit of commonsense, anti organisation parralysing advice I have
seen in a voluntary organisation in a long time. Well written Robert.

Ken

On Tue, 2005-03-01 at 00:50 +1100, Robert Thorsby wrote:
> On 2005.02.28 21:30 Ashley wrote:
> >>> You're being nominated for an Ordinary Member position on the 
> >>> committee, not as public officer (as far as I can see).  The Public
> >>> Officer of an association is a single, particular person, who acts
> >>> as the "legal face" of the association.
> >>> 
> >> 
> >> Thanks for clearing that up. I really have no idea about most of 
> >> this stuff.
> >> 
> > Why not  check with the apropriate authority? A short phone call 
> > should remove all doubt.
> 
> As a former bureaucrat with over 30 yrs experience (most of it in Legal 
> Branches) I recommend that you _never_ check the legality of your 
> intended actions with a Public Servant. They will always give you the 
> most conservative answer they can (or the one that is most in favour of 
> the Dept).
> 
> The nonsense written about LH's nomination has gone on far enough. He 
> is presumably competent (i.e., not insane); as an Ordinary Committeeman 
> he can take no action unilaterally; (again presumably) there is no 
> explicit rule in SLUG's Rules that preclude his election; he will not 
> be undertaking (apart from voting) any action for which his nonage 
> might be an incumbrance; and, remember, there are no common law rules 
> -- apart from mental incompetence or, possibly, an age of such tender 
> years that understanding itself is in question -- on who can and who 
> cannot vote in a private association.
> 
> Let him stand -- and then insist that anyone who challenges his 
> election point to an unequivocal, written, Law or binding Court 
> judgement that explicitly and unambiguously states otherwise, in which 
> case there will be (from that moment on) a casual vacancy in the 
> Committee but all decisions made by or contributed to by LH prior 
> thereto will stand and be binding on the members of SLUG.
> 
> Volunteer associations are never in a position to knock back a willing 
> worker.
> 
> Robert Thorsby

-- 
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html

Re: [SLUG] Re: Weird login behaviour

[QuantumG]

Andrew Bennetts wrote:
You claimed:
o one can load kernel codes other than loadable kernel modules(LKM) that are
'enabled'.  If you try to load an LKM that is not configured the Kernel will
not allow it. And because only a dozen or so LKMs are enabled instead of,
perhaps, hundreds LKMs, it is easy to manage these.
   

This is false, but you still haven't admitted that it was anywhere that I
can see.
I dunno if anyone else has said this or not, but /dev/kmem and the joy 
of kernel exploits can allow an attacker to taint a kernel in ways that 
you simply cannot detect.  Not to mention the fact that kernel modules 
are not signed or checksumed in any way so it is trivial to modify them 
on the disk so they are tainted on next reboot. 

Trent
--
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html

Re: [SLUG] Re: Weird login behaviour

[Andrew Bennetts]

On Tue, Mar 01, 2005 at 07:42:41AM +1100, O Plameras wrote:
[...]
> 
> I think the differences of interpretation here were in the way I and you 
> conceptualize
> the kernel codes.

No, it's that you've changed what you're talking about half-way through the
thread.

[...]
> 
> In the context at the beginning of this discussion is the issue of 
> security.  I  was trying
> to say I re-compile the kernel I used when it is critical to security. I 
> went on to say
> the object of re-compiling is to prevent anyone 'rootkit'ing by LKM. And 
> I went on to
> say I can prevent someone 'rootkit'ing by LKM by removing modules
> (not configuring modules) in the kernel.

You claimed:

> No one can load kernel codes other than loadable kernel modules(LKM) that are
> 'enabled'.  If you try to load an LKM that is not configured the Kernel will
> not allow it. And because only a dozen or so LKMs are enabled instead of,
> perhaps, hundreds LKMs, it is easy to manage these.

This is false, but you still haven't admitted that it was anywhere that I
can see.

And this is a much different claim to saying that running a monolithic
kernel (where loadable kernel module support is disabled by
CONFIG_MODULES=n) prevents loading of any kernel module, hostile or not.

> But it does not bother me to see that  discussions arise about trivial 
> items on symantecs
> which are not helpful as far as I am concerned. I'm more interested to 
> learn what others
> are doing in terms of security, etc., the things that matters most 
> rather than trivialities.

It bothers me that you said something false.  You then claimed that you
meant something else, by saying your definition of "module" was something
else.  Unfortunately, the term "loadable kernel module", which you used,
clearly means something other than your definition.

I strongly recommend trying to use the same terminology as everyone else.
It will make these discussions much more productive, and it will look a lot
less like you're trying to change positions half-way through an argument.

-Andrew.

-- 
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html

[SLUG] Getting packages on DebianXandros

[skip evans]

Greetings all from Montana, USA!
I have a desktop install of Xandros 2.0, which is a
distribution based on Debian. The only line in the
/etc/apt/sources.list file is:
deb http://xnv2.xandros.com/2.0/pkg xandros2.0-xn main contrib non-free
There are several packages I would like to install,
but are not able to be located by this limites sources.list
file.
My issue, though, is that I have added lines to this file
before, but was led to believe that just adding new
entries to this file sort of willy nilly can cause problems:
components written over causing some other apps
to break, etc.
I need a little advice, or direction, on how I can expand
this file to make more packages available, safely, if that
is possible.
Thanks much!
Skip Evans
Whitehall, Montana
USA
_
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! 
http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/

--
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html

Re: [SLUG] Re: Weird login behaviour

[David Kempe]

O Plameras wrote:
But it does not bother me to see that  discussions arise about trivial 
items on symantecs
which are not helpful as far as I am concerned. I'm more interested to 
learn what others
are doing in terms of security, etc., the things that matters most 
rather than trivialities.

well perhaps you might want to consider grsecurity, it can help prevent 
a bunch of rootkits that might like to take hold:

http://grsecurity.net/features.php
perhaps even prevent hostile modules from loading in some instances.
as for your compiling or not compiling modules support or not, I think 
the issue has beens sufficiently blurred to be useless. lets move on.

dave
--
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html

[SLUG] alsa + Audigy2 + Logitech Z5500 not loud enuf

[Kevin Saenz]

Hi all,

I have bought an Audigy2 Sound card to go with my Logitech Z5500 speaker set,
what I have found is to get a semi reasonable volume level I have to
pump the speaker volume to near max, run alsamixer and set pcm and
speaker out close to distorted sound levels to hear anything. The
speakers are also connected to Foxtel and I have to turn the sound
back down to 3  to stay in the lounge room and enjoy my shows.
Why is the audio controls set real low under alsa? How can I set the
volume to a reasonable rate where I don't have to max the amp's volume
control?

Thanks

Kevin
-- 
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html

Re: [SLUG] Re: Weird login behaviour

[O Plameras]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 15:41:57 +1100, O Plameras
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
 

1. In CONFIG_=y I am telling the kernel load the modules at
boot time; in CONFIG_MODULES=n I am telling the kernel
   

Are you sure about that?
I was always (and I've been compiling Linux kernels for over ten years
now) under the impression that when a device driver or whatever is
compiled into the kernel then its code is put right inside the single kernel
code file and no "module support" is required for that. I don't see the
sense of distinguishing "boot time" from "run time" - from the kernel's
 

1. 'boot time' is  an instant of time when the Core kernel binaries are 
loaded into
memory for execution. Any binary or program code has to be loaded into 
memory
before it will execute and I call this instant of time as execution time 
or load time.
For the Core kernel I referred to it as 'boot time' or 'start time' 
because before it
nothing was running.

2. 'run time' is any instant of time when the kernel is running and this 
is after
'boot time'. I use 'run time' to describe a situation where a Core kernel is
running and whilst it's running I add an extension or module to that running
Core kernel.

It is important for me to differentiate between the two, in the context 
of what
I was describing, namely: that  device drivers, file systems drivers, 
system calls,
and all those modules that sits just above on the next layer of the Core 
kernel
may be loaded in two (2) ways, at 'boot time' or at 'run time'  
depending  on
how the kernel was configured during compilation time.

I think the differences of interpretation here were in the way I and you 
conceptualize
the kernel codes.

I conceptualize the kernel codes (Core and Modules) as Logical 
entities.  These
Logical entities may be arranged in differentiate physical ways, namely:
1. One physical file, i.e., CONFIG_=y plus CONFIG_MODULES=n.
2. Many related physical files, i.e., CONFIG_=m(=y) plus 
CONFIG_MODULES=y

For me, irregardless of the physical arrangement, I conceptualize the 
Core kernel as
separate entity from the modules (device drivers, file system drivers, 
system calls, etc).

With item 1. above everything is loaded when the Core kernel is loaded 
at 'boot time'
obviously because everything is in one file. After 'boot time' no 
additional kernel
modules maybe loaded.

With item 2. above the Core kernel is loaded first and others may be 
loaded at 'run time'
as needed.

There are possibilities that 'clever' people may succeed in loading 
hostile codes in this
situation.

In the context at the beginning of this discussion is the issue of 
security.  I  was trying
to say I re-compile the kernel I used when it is critical to security. I 
went on to say
the object of re-compiling is to prevent anyone 'rootkit'ing by LKM. And 
I went on to
say I can prevent someone 'rootkit'ing by LKM by removing modules
(not configuring modules) in the kernel.

But it does not bother me to see that  discussions arise about trivial 
items on symantecs
which are not helpful as far as I am concerned. I'm more interested to 
learn what others
are doing in terms of security, etc., the things that matters most 
rather than trivialities.

.snipped
I can't find the exact "menuconfig" help text right now, but to quote
README.Menuconfig:
-Some kernel features may be built directly into the kernel.
-Some may be made into loadable runtime modules.  Some features
-may be completely removed altogether.  There are also certain
See that first line? "directly into the kernel".
Where did you get the "boot time only loading modules" from?
 

to NOT ALLOW  the loading of modules at run time.  In the
   

What is the definition of "run time" vs. "boot time"? Can you show
a sample output or code or some reference for that? It's the first
time I heard about such distinction.
 

I have defined this at the beginning.
--
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html

Re: [SLUG] Re: Nomination: Lindsay Holmwood

[Ken Foskey]

On Tue, 2005-03-01 at 01:44 +1100, jan schmidt wrote:

> And given that stance on under-18 members of the committee, I would like
> to nominate Chris Deigan for the position of Ordinary Committee Member.
> Chris has been a backbone of SLUG for a couple of years as an honourary
> committee member - we should make it official.

For the books - seconded.

Robert - well said.

-- 
Ken Foskey
OpenOffice.org developer


-- 
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html

Re: [SLUG] Re: Nomination: Lindsay Holmwood

[jan schmidt]

On Tue, 2005-03-01 at 00:50 +1100, Robert Thorsby wrote:
>Let him stand -- and then insist that anyone who challenges his 
>election point to an unequivocal, written, Law or binding Court 
>judgement that explicitly and unambiguously states otherwise, in which 
>case there will be (from that moment on) a casual vacancy in the 
>Committee but all decisions made by or contributed to by LH prior 
>thereto will stand and be binding on the members of SLUG.
>

I agree. 

And given that stance on under-18 members of the committee, I would like
to nominate Chris Deigan for the position of Ordinary Committee Member.
Chris has been a backbone of SLUG for a couple of years as an honourary
committee member - we should make it official.

Cheers,
Jan.
-- 
Jan Schmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
-- 
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html

Re: [SLUG] Re: Nomination: Lindsay Holmwood

[Robert Thorsby]

On 2005.02.28 21:30 Ashley wrote:
You're being nominated for an Ordinary Member position on the 
committee, not as public officer (as far as I can see).  The Public
Officer of an association is a single, particular person, who acts
as the "legal face" of the association.

Thanks for clearing that up. I really have no idea about most of 
this stuff.

Why not  check with the apropriate authority? A short phone call 
should remove all doubt.
As a former bureaucrat with over 30 yrs experience (most of it in Legal 
Branches) I recommend that you _never_ check the legality of your 
intended actions with a Public Servant. They will always give you the 
most conservative answer they can (or the one that is most in favour of 
the Dept).

The nonsense written about LH's nomination has gone on far enough. He 
is presumably competent (i.e., not insane); as an Ordinary Committeeman 
he can take no action unilaterally; (again presumably) there is no 
explicit rule in SLUG's Rules that preclude his election; he will not 
be undertaking (apart from voting) any action for which his nonage 
might be an incumbrance; and, remember, there are no common law rules 
-- apart from mental incompetence or, possibly, an age of such tender 
years that understanding itself is in question -- on who can and who 
cannot vote in a private association.

Let him stand -- and then insist that anyone who challenges his 
election point to an unequivocal, written, Law or binding Court 
judgement that explicitly and unambiguously states otherwise, in which 
case there will be (from that moment on) a casual vacancy in the 
Committee but all decisions made by or contributed to by LH prior 
thereto will stand and be binding on the members of SLUG.

Volunteer associations are never in a position to knock back a willing 
worker.

Robert Thorsby
--
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html

Re: [SLUG] Re: Nomination: Lindsay Holmwood

[Ashley]

Lindsay Holmwood wrote:
On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 00:35:34 +1100
Matthew Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
 

You're being nominated for an Ordinary Member position on the committee, not
as public officer (as far as I can see).  The Public Officer of an
association is a single, particular person, who acts as the "legal face" of
the association.
   

Thanks for clearing that up. I really have no idea about most of this stuff.
 

Why not  check with the apropriate authority? A short phone call should 
remove all doubt.

Stay well and happy
Heracles
--
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html

[SLUG] Official SLUG T-Shirts now available for order

[Grant Parnell - EverythingLinux]

The SLUG committee has organised through ELX the manufacture of SLUG 
shirts made to order. Perfect for your next geek event or perhaps your 
next casual business meeting. 

Available in many sizes and choice of black, white or grey for $16.95 or 
$12.00 for financial members. If you're not a financial member, why not 
join up at the next SLUG meeting for only $25 for the year starting from 
April 1st (the AGM).

Here's where you can get'em

http://www.elx.com.au/item/tslug
Or 
http://www.elx.com.au/item/tslug-members (proof of membership required)

-- 
-- 
** ROOM FOR RENT $120pw (neg) near Newington Shops 525/401 buses **
Grant Parnell - senior consultant
EverythingLinux services - the consultant's backup & tech support.
Web: http://www.everythinglinux.com.au/support.php
We're also busybits.com.au and linuxhelp.com.au and elx.com.au.
Phone 02 8756 3522 to book service or discuss your needs.

ELX or its employees participate in the following:-
OSIA (Open Source Industry Australia) - http://www.osia.net.au
AUUG (Australian Unix Users Group) - http://www.auug.org.au
SLUG (Sydney Linux Users Group) - http://www.slug.org.au
LA (Linux Australia) - http://www.linux.org.au

-- 
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html

[SLUG] March meeting of the Sydney PostgreSQL Users Group

[Gavin Sherry]

Hi all,

We are back to our usual location for the March meeting of the PostgreSQL
Users Group.

Meet us at the James Squire Brew House[1]  at King St Wharf from 18:30
onwards on the 1st of March.

Anand Kumria will be giving a presentation on best practice in schema
design. He will take the schema from an existing OSS project which uses
MySQL, rewrite the schema for PostgreSQL and make use of the schema
normalisation and referential integrity mechanisms which should all be
using in our projects.

Neil Conway will be giving a the buffer management strategy in 8.0 which
was recently discovered to be covered in a pending patent filed by IBM.
The presentation will cover:
- a review of buffer management in a DBMS, and a summary of the ARC
algorithm
- the discovery of the patent and how we decided to deal with it
- lessons learned (i.e. the latter being what other OSS contributors can
take away WRT dealing with patents)

See you there.

Gavin

[1]http://www.malt-shovel.com.au/brewhouse.asp?Sydney=true

-- 
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html

Re: [SLUG] Nomination: Robert Collins

[Tony Green]

On 28/02/2005, at 10:25 PM, Jeff Waugh wrote:
s/hook/hookers/ -> take away the cash supply, vote [1] Robert Collins 
for
treasurer!

Come on - the charges were dropped due to lack of evidence.  He's paid 
back most of the money now!
--
Tony Green <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

--
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html

Re: [SLUG] Nomination: Robert Collins

[Craige McWhirter]

On Mon, 2005-02-28 at 22:06 +1100, Tony Green wrote:

>Seconded - even if it's just to get Jaq off the hook this year!

I'd like to thank Jamie for all the work he's done this year and in
previous years in what is the heaviest workload most thankless task.
You've done a great job keeping the SLUG finances in order Jaq, the work
was much appreciated.

-- 

Cheers,
  Craige 
-- 
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html

Re: [SLUG] Nomination: Robert Collins

[Jeff Waugh]

> > > I'd like to nominate Rob Collins for Treasurer.
> > >
> > > I suck at writing reasons, so I won't even bother. :)
> >
> > I accept ... damn :)
> 
> Seconded - even if it's just to get Jaq off the hook this year!

s/hook/hookers/ -> take away the cash supply, vote [1] Robert Collins for
treasurer!

- Jeff

-- 
gnome.conf.au 2005: April 19thhttp://live.gnome.org/Canberra2005
 
"...and did you know that Twisties have real cheese in them?" - Dave
"I didn't even think they had real twists in them!" - Andrew
-- 
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html

Re: [SLUG] Nomination: Robert Collins

[Tony Green]

On 28/02/2005, at 9:53 PM, Robert Collins wrote:
On Mon, 2005-02-28 at 21:43 +1100, Chris Deigan wrote:
Evening,
I'd like to nominate Rob Collins for Treasurer.
I suck at writing reasons, so I won't even bother. :)
I accept ... damn :)
Seconded - even if it's just to get Jaq off the hook this year!
--
Tony Green <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html

Re: [SLUG] Nomination: Robert Collins

[Robert Collins]

On Mon, 2005-02-28 at 21:43 +1100, Chris Deigan wrote:
>Evening,
>
>I'd like to nominate Rob Collins for Treasurer.
>
>I suck at writing reasons, so I won't even bother. :)

I accept ... damn :)

Rob
-- 
GPG key available at: .


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- 
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html

Re: [SLUG] Sharing partition 'tween Linux and Winders (for video editing)

[Elliott-Brennan]

Ben, Hi.
I'm informed that FAT32 and VFAT are the same. I wasn't aware of this 
until recently either :)

Patrick
Ben Donohue wrote:
what about FAT32?
I don't know what VFAT is, so if it is fat32 forget I made this post
Ben
Elliott-Brennan wrote:
Hi,
I'm looking for some ideas about sharing a partition.
I have Fedora Core 3 on one HDD (200G), dual booting with XP on a 
second HDD (20G).

I want to share about 100G of the FC drive to allow space for both 
OSs to share video material for editing and DVD burning (I'm 
trialling a few options in both OSs).

I gather that formatting the shared partition as VFAT is an option, 
but that it may be too slow for my intentions.

Has anyone any experience around this, or with ideas about the best 
way to manage what I'm wishing to do?

Any suggestions, ideas or advice would be most appreciated.
Thanks.
Regards,
   Patrick


--
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html

[SLUG] Nomination: Robert Collins

[Chris Deigan]

Evening,

I'd like to nominate Rob Collins for Treasurer.

I suck at writing reasons, so I won't even bother. :)

Chris.
-- 
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html

Re: [SLUG] Sharing partition 'tween Linux and Winders (for video editing)

[Ben Donohue]

what about FAT32?
I don't know what VFAT is, so if it is fat32 forget I made this post
Ben
Elliott-Brennan wrote:
Hi,
I'm looking for some ideas about sharing a partition.
I have Fedora Core 3 on one HDD (200G), dual booting with XP on a 
second HDD (20G).

I want to share about 100G of the FC drive to allow space for both OSs 
to share video material for editing and DVD burning (I'm trialling a 
few options in both OSs).

I gather that formatting the shared partition as VFAT is an option, 
but that it may be too slow for my intentions.

Has anyone any experience around this, or with ideas about the best 
way to manage what I'm wishing to do?

Any suggestions, ideas or advice would be most appreciated.
Thanks.
Regards,
   Patrick
--
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html