On 05/31/2009 08:13 PM, Dag Wieers wrote:
To facilitate this, we need a standard to refer to these mugshots and for
this I'd like to propose the following convention for everyone who wants
his mugshot to be used:
DagWieers/DagWieers96.png
My pic is a bit small, but its there now. Will
On Mon, 2009-06-01 at 22:14 +0200, Dag Wieers wrote:
On Mon, 1 Jun 2009, Marcus Moeller wrote:
Will the newsletter be published via email subscibtion or only on the wiki?
Well, currently the plan is to release it on the wiki. I have no easy way
of converting it to something that
Hi,
Dag Wieers announced the first bi-weekly CentOS Newsletter today:
http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-newsletter/2009-June/00.html
This Newsletter is considered as an important interface between the
CentOS team and the CentOS community.
If you want to be informed when a new
2009/6/1 Juan Carlos Mendoza R. jcarlo...@hotmail.com:
* smb.conf **
workgroup = CVA
server string = Samba Server Version %v
netbios name = domine
dominio admin users = Administrator @Domain Admins
^^
Esto es correcto? Has revisado la
Podrias revisar estos links son interesantes...!
http://www.howtoforge.com/zimbra-collaboration-suite-open-source-edition-on-centos
http://www.screencasts.es/2008/06/18/tutorial-instalacion-de-zimbra/
Saludos.
El 1 de junio de 2009 18:56, Cesar Augusto Martinez Cobo
Hi all,
Has anyone used TrueCrypt on a XEN based machine before? I'm running
CentOS 5.3 with kernel 2.6.18 but when I launch TrueCrypt, it keeps on
telling me I need kernel 2.6.24 or later.
Your system uses an old version of the Linux Kernel.
Due to a bug in the Linux Kernel, your system may
Rudi Ahlers wrote:
Hi all,
Has anyone used TrueCrypt on a XEN based machine before? I'm running
CentOS 5.3 with kernel 2.6.18 but when I launch TrueCrypt, it keeps on
telling me I need kernel 2.6.24 or later.
Your system uses an old version of the Linux Kernel.
Due to a bug in the Linux
Hello, all.
I have operated centos 4.x and 5.x system.
for 4.x system, I auto update using yum
and for 5.x system, using yum-cron.
but I can't find any yum-cron package (i386) like below.
# yum search yum-cron(at i686, centox 5.3)
Warning: No matches found for: yum-cron
No Matches
MontyRee wrote:
Hello, all.
I have operated centos 4.x and 5.x system.
for 4.x system, I auto update using yum and for 5.x system, using
yum-cron.
but I can't find any yum-cron package (i386) like below.
# yum search yum-cron(at i686, centox 5.3)
Warning: No matches found for:
On 06/02/2009 09:19 AM, MontyRee wrote:
# yum search yum-cron(at i686, centox 5.3)
Warning: No matches found for: yum-cron
No Matches found
yum-cron has a bit of history really.
But in a nutshell, do you need yumcron to do something that cant be done
with yum-updatesd itself ? Make sure you
2009/6/2 Michael A. Peters mpet...@mac.com
MontyRee wrote:
Hello, all.
I have operated centos 4.x and 5.x system.
for 4.x system, I auto update using yum and for 5.x system, using
yum-cron.
but I can't find any yum-cron package (i386) like below.
# yum search yum-cron(at
Matt Harrington wrote:
Should unprivileged users be able to change their shell with lchsh on
5.3 and, if it matters, CentOS Directory Server? lchsh seems to
require more open permissions than those which come with a default
installation:
Error initializing libuser: could not open
hello all.
My system is centos 5.x and there is no module related auditd
there is no process(daemon) related auditd and selinux definately disabled.
But I can see lots of auditd messages like below.
Oct 20 02:01:01 linux kernel: type=1106 audit(1224435661.064:65210): user
pid=25860 uid=0
hi,
since i don't use centos very heavily i'm not too familiar with the
centos/rhel release/update process (and i didn't do much research on this):
is it normal behavior that through the use of yum update systems are
forced to follow the point releases of a major release (5.0 - 5.1 -
5.2, etc)?
Hi;
I have Centos 5.3 on my labtop and have to vpn a cisco vpn server. So i
installed vpnc on my box. Then i want to integrate with NetworkManager and
vpnc so i also installed NetworkManager-vpnc 7.0. I configured vpn
connection and tried to connect. It looks like it connected but when i try
to
Hi
The major release of CentOS/RHEL is from 5.x - 6.x.
The 5.0 - 5.1 - 5.2 ... is a update security, and all shared the
same repository, and the line of version the packages is to update.
In some package case is major update because of security update, eg.
firefox 1.5 to 3.0. Mozilla a long time
Matthias Leopold wrote on Tue, 02 Jun 2009 13:56:47 +0200:
is it normal behavior that through the use of yum update systems are
forced to follow the point releases of a major release (5.0 - 5.1 -
5.2, etc)? is there a way and would it make sense to stay within one
particular release and
MontyRee wrote:
hello all.
My system is centos 5.x and there is no module related auditd
there is no process(daemon) related auditd and selinux definately disabled.
But I can see lots of auditd messages like below.
Oct 20 02:01:01 linux kernel: type=1106
Hi List,
optimizing the configuration on one of our servers (which was
hit by a brute force attack on dovecot) showed an odd behavior.
The short story:
On one of our servers an attacker did a brute force
attack on dovecot (pop3).
Since the attacker closed and reopened the connection
after
Radu-Cristian FOTESCU wrote:
AFAIK, this never happened. Is the 5.x.z tree concept dead-before-birth?!
For CentOS: Yes.
For Upstream: Ask Red Hat.
Ralph
pgpvVtxZUcKsC.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
Hi,
I am pleased to announce the first edition of the bi-weekly CentOS
newsletter which we dubbed CentOS Pulse.
This first issue centers around improving communication within the CentOS
community and how that relates to the CentOS Promo SIG. We also look at
the recent announcements regarding
On 06/02/2009 02:27 PM, Radu-Cristian FOTESCU wrote:
So there *should* have existed:
* 5.1-only updates issued post-5.2;
* 5.1-only and 5.2-only updates issued post-5.3;
etc.
go back and reread the entire list of comments. You seem quite confused
about what should and should not exist.
- KB
--- On Tue, 6/2/09, Karanbir Singh mail-li...@karan.org wrote:
So there *should* have existed:
* 5.1-only updates issued post-5.2;
* 5.1-only and 5.2-only updates issued post-5.3;
etc.
go back and reread the entire list of comments.
You seem quite confused
about what should and
--- On Tue, 6/2/09, Ralph Angenendt ra+cen...@br-online.de wrote:
For CentOS: Yes.
But Karanbir says I seem quite confused about what should and should not
exist. How can you answer correctly to an incorrect question raised by an
confused ignorant?
For Upstream: Ask Red Hat.
I was
On Tue, 2 Jun 2009, Radu-Cristian FOTESCU wrote:
For CentOS: Yes.
But Karanbir says I seem quite confused about what should and should not
exist. How can you answer correctly to an incorrect question raised by an
confused ignorant?
For Upstream: Ask Red Hat.
I was hoping *you* (some of
Hi :)
Sorry for my bad english i'm a frenchi...
I have a little question about mysql.
What is the difference between mysql-server in centos vs the rpm build
by Sun ( Mysql community edition)
RedHat apply homemade patch or they only backport Sun patch?
Cordialement,
Beugin Thomas
Henry ritzlmayr wrote on Tue, 02 Jun 2009 14:51:23 +0200:
-Only the last try gets logged.
can't reproduce this. The following was done in one connection to
localhost.
Jun 2 17:09:10 d01 dovecot-auth: pam_unix(dovecot:auth): check pass; user
unknown
Jun 2 17:09:10 d01 dovecot-auth:
On Jun 1, 2009, at 9:52 PM, Michael A. Peters wrote:
I've read a lot of different reports that suggest at this point in
time,
kernel software raid is in most cases better than controller raid.
I manage systems with both.
I like hardware RAID controllers. Yes, they do cost money up front,
On Mon, Jun 1, 2009 at 10:52 PM, Michael A. Peters mpet...@mac.com wrote:
-=- starting as new thread as it is off topic from controller thread -=-
Ross Walker wrote:
The real key is the controller though. Get one that can do hardware
RAID1/10, 5/50, 6/60, if it can do both SATA and
bytes
Desc: not available
Url :
http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-announce/attachments/20090602/13dc3c5b/attachment-0001.bin
--
___
CentOS-announce mailing list
centos-annou...@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org
On 06/01/2009 07:52 PM, Michael A. Peters wrote:
I've read a lot of different reports that suggest at this point in time,
kernel software raid is in most cases better than controller raid.
There are certainly a lot of people who feel that way. It depends on
what your priorities are.
On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 8:41 AM, Dag Wieers d...@centos.org wrote:
I am pleased to announce the first edition of the bi-weekly CentOS
newsletter which we dubbed CentOS Pulse.
snip
Dag: I read the first issue. Great idea! Please post here, each time
you post a new edition. Lanny
On Tue, June 2, 2009 1:48 pm, mcclnx mcc wrote:
I have been a while did NOT received E-MAIL from centos listserv. Any
problem on CENTOS listserv?
No Prob here. Been recieving mail. Might want to check spam filter.
Bo Lynch
___
CentOS
mcclnx mcc wrote:
I have been a while did NOT received E-MAIL from centos listserv.
Any problem on CENTOS listserv?
No. I would be interested if you get this mail, though :)
Ralph
pgpw5vXmC7FDR.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
CentOS mailing
On Tue, 2 Jun 2009, Lanny Marcus wrote:
On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 8:41 AM, Dag Wieers d...@centos.org wrote:
I am pleased to announce the first edition of the bi-weekly CentOS
newsletter which we dubbed CentOS Pulse.
snip
Dag: I read the first issue. Great idea! Please post here, each time
--- On Tue, 6/2/09, Dag Wieers d...@centos.org wrote:
Communication problems are usually caused by both sides.
Agreed.
Besides the EUS source RPM packages are not released
to the public, so you need those expensive entitlements
to be able to rebuild them.
Eek. Never knew that. This
On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 12:59 PM, Gordon Messmer yiny...@eburg.com wrote:
On 06/01/2009 07:52 PM, Michael A. Peters wrote:
I've read a lot of different reports that suggest at this point in time,
kernel software raid is in most cases better than controller raid.
There are certainly a lot of
on 6-2-2009 1:53 PM Radu-Cristian FOTESCU spake the following:
--- On Tue, 6/2/09, Dag Wieers dag-ifyaizf+flcdnm+yrof...@public.gmane.org
wrote:
Communication problems are usually caused by both sides.
Agreed.
Besides the EUS source RPM packages are not released
to the public, so
At Tue, 2 Jun 2009 17:21:15 +0200 CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org wrote:
Hi :)
Sorry for my bad english i'm a frenchi...
I have a little question about mysql.
What is the difference between mysql-server in centos vs the rpm build
by Sun ( Mysql community edition)
RedHat
on 6-2-2009 5:51 AM henry ritzlmayr spake the following:
Hi List,
optimizing the configuration on one of our servers (which was
hit by a brute force attack on dovecot) showed an odd behavior.
The short story:
On one of our servers an attacker did a brute force
attack on dovecot
Hi all,
One of our CentOS 5.3 randomly reboots, at different times of the day,
and I can't see why it's doing it.
I have looked through the logs, but don't see any thing in there that
shows me why it has rebooted. How can I debug this?
Here's a snipped from the log, around the time of the
on 6-2-2009 2:30 PM Rudi Ahlers spake the following:
Hi all,
One of our CentOS 5.3 randomly reboots, at different times of the day,
and I can't see why it's doing it.
I have looked through the logs, but don't see any thing in there that
shows me why it has rebooted. How can I debug this?
On 6/2/09, Scott Silva ssi...@sgvwater.com wrote:
on 6-2-2009 2:30 PM Rudi Ahlers spake the following:
Hi all,
One of our CentOS 5.3 randomly reboots, at different times of the day,
and I can't see why it's doing it.
I have looked through the logs, but don't see any thing in there that
On Tue, 02 Jun 2009 23:46:39 +0200
Rudi Ahlers wrote:
So, I'm trying todo everything I can, from my side, via SSH to see if
I can figure it out.
If it's a hardware-related issue, as Scott suggested, you can spend all the
time you want fiddling around with the software and you'll never solve
I've read a lot of different reports that suggest at this point in time,
kernel software raid is in most cases better than controller raid.
Let me define 'most cases' for you. Linux software raid can perform
better or the same if you are using raid0/raid1/raid1+0 arrays. If you
are using
on 6-2-2009 2:46 PM Rudi Ahlers spake the following:
On 6/2/09, Scott Silva ssi...@sgvwater.com wrote:
on 6-2-2009 2:30 PM Rudi Ahlers spake the following:
Hi all,
One of our CentOS 5.3 randomly reboots, at different times of the day,
and I can't see why it's doing it.
I have looked
Frank Cox wrote:
So, I'm trying todo everything I can, from my side, via SSH to see if
I can figure it out.
If it's a hardware-related issue, as Scott suggested, you can spend all the
time you want fiddling around with the software and you'll never solve the
problem.
Yes, you'll almost
I have, a machine running RHEL ES 4.7 with 2 physical interfaces.
eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:14:22:1C:B4:EA
inet addr:10.7.13.61 Bcast:10.7.13.255 Mask:255.255.255.0
inet6 addr: fe80::214:22ff:fe1c:b4ea/64 Scope:Link
UP BROADCAST RUNNING
On Tue, 2 Jun 2009, Ralph Angenendt wrote:
Radu-Cristian FOTESCU wrote:
AFAIK, this never happened. Is the 5.x.z tree concept dead-before-birth?!
For CentOS: Yes.
For Upstream: Ask Red Hat.
Ralph
I have asked RHT repeatedly to walk me through the life of a package
version. Nothing.
Chan Chung Hang Christopher wrote:
Complete bollocks. The bottleneck is not the drives themselves as
whether it is SATA/PATA disk drive performance has not changed much
which is why 15k RPM disks are still king. The bottleneck is the bus be
it PCI-X or PCIe 16x/8x/4x or at least the latencies
nate wrote:
Chan Chung Hang Christopher wrote:
Complete bollocks. The bottleneck is not the drives themselves as
whether it is SATA/PATA disk drive performance has not changed much
which is why 15k RPM disks are still king. The bottleneck is the bus be
it PCI-X or PCIe 16x/8x/4x or at
John R Pierce wrote:
Chan Chung Hang Christopher wrote:
I've read a lot of different reports that suggest at this point in time,
kernel software raid is in most cases better than controller raid.
Let me define 'most cases' for you. Linux software raid can perform
Yahoo has been having internal problems with a recent change to their
spam filter. It's randomly [*] reporting IP addresses as being listed
on the Spamhaus blocklist (when those IPs are not listed), and
therefore incorrectly rejecting mail in unpredictable ways. This has
been going on for almost
Guys, apache cpus usage is hitting 100% sometimes ( to such an extent that its
very noticeable) on a box with just 8 users or so.
i m getting this when i run 'top'. The worrying thing is seeing the work
'atack' under command
PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEMTIME+ COMMAND
sorry typos amended
Guys, apache's cpu usage is hitting
100% sometimes ( to such an extent that its
very noticeable)
on a box ( 2gb ram) with just 8 users or so. This newver happended before.
i m getting this when i
run 'top'. The worrying thing is seeing the word 'atack'
under
On Tue, Jun 02, 2009 at 08:23:16PM -0700, Linux Advocate wrote:
Hell, has my centos 5.3 box been hacked??? Help !!
Yes. Reinstall; fully update components; restore *data*
from backups (you have backups, right?) and review what
web packages you have installed
John R. Dennison wrote:
On Tue, Jun 02, 2009 at 08:23:16PM -0700, Linux Advocate wrote:
Hell, has my centos 5.3 box been hacked??? Help !!
Yes. Reinstall; fully update components; restore *data*
from backups (you have backups, right?) and review what
John R. Dennison wrote:
On Tue, Jun 02, 2009 at 08:23:16PM -0700, Linux Advocate wrote:
Hell, has my centos 5.3 box been hacked??? Help !!
Yes. Reinstall; fully update components; restore *data*
from backups (you have backups, right?) and review what
some google foo shows this is a WINDOWS exploit not a linux one.
http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/slackware-14/analyzing-apache-logs-174552/
___
yes, william, i saw those links when i googledi too did no think it related
to me
reply below
- Original Message
From: John R. Dennison j...@gerdesas.com
To: CentOS mailing list centos@centos.org
Sent: Wednesday, June 3, 2009 11:43:46 AM
Subject: Re: [CentOS] Centos 5.3 - Apache - Under Attack ? Oh hell
On Tue, Jun 02, 2009 at 08:23:16PM -0700, Linux
Hello:
If there are processes running on your machine
which you do not recognize, assume the machine has
been compromised. Take it offline and wipe it
immediately.
Neil
--
Neil Aggarwal, (832)245-7314, www.JAMMConsulting.com
Eliminate junk email and reclaim your inbox.
Visit
On Tue, Jun 02, 2009 at 09:01:35PM -0700, Linux Advocate wrote:
o godd.
i have a quite a few linux boxes and not even one has been hacked. oh man
!!
That you have noticed.
really??? i have to format the box.
it's possible your box is attacked, has been compromised.. of it's possible
that it's also being slammed by some sort of potential attack/hack.
regarding the apache app, what do the log files say... what apps do you have
running on the apche server? are these apps home grown, or installed from
On Tue, Jun 02, 2009 at 09:34:55PM -0700, bruce wrote:
it's possible your box is attacked, has been compromised.. of it's possible
that it's also being slammed by some sort of potential attack/hack.
regarding the apache app, what do the log files say... what apps do you have
running on the
nope...
not kidding... the majority of windows based attacks on an apache system
running on linux systems are obnoxiousm but not harmful... the kinds of
attacks that are looking to exploit windows buffer overflows are harmless to
linux systems..
this isn't to say that all windows attacks are
htebruce wrote:
it's possible your box is attacked, has been compromised.. of it's possible
that it's also being slammed by some sort of potential attack/hack.
regarding the apache app, what do the log files say... what apps do you have
running on the apche server? are these apps home grown,
On Tue, Jun 02, 2009 at 09:48:41PM -0700, bruce wrote:
not kidding... the majority of windows based attacks on an apache system
running on linux systems are obnoxiousm but not harmful... the kinds of
attacks that are looking to exploit windows buffer overflows are harmless to
linux systems..
you and i agreee on him figuring out what web apps are causing the issues..
or in fact, exactly what the 'atack' process is? i didn't see the initial
threads.. was this simething that he discussed? did he say what the arack
process was doing?
my only point, was that reinstalling wotjout
Bruce:
i'm inclined to think the processs is something on his server...
now, how it got there is a curious issue that he's going to have to
address..
This is precisely the point. An unauthorized user currently
has the ability to run processed on the machine. We do
not know what they have
neil...
you state that ..An unauthorized user currently has the ability to run
processed on the machine
how do we know that.. did i miss something in an earlier thread.. don't get
me wrong, you might know more on this thread than the few msgs i saw... al i
saw was that there was the 'atack'
On Wed, Jun 03, 2009 at 12:30:10AM -0500, Neil Aggarwal wrote:
It would be prudent to review his web code to see
if he did something in an insecure way. If his code
is open to attack, it will be so even if he puts it
on a new machine.
Hence my statements to evaluate the web-apps he
71 matches
Mail list logo
