On 23 September 2017 at 01:51, wrote:
> This topic was discussed earlier: no, go is not worth it. It's really a bad
> compromise against simple and explicit C. Wrong again: simple and explicit C
> is
Not sure who came up with that conclusion. Granted, you can solve many
problems surprinsingly we
Thanks for your input Gary.
> The only way I would trust something like this on my network is if the
> payload is signed, by a central authority/user. The signature can be
> verified with a public key, and it should be able to verify that the
> payload was not altered since the signature was appl
Fairly new here, but I have stuff to say.
On the actual subject:
Any massive effort to get root execution across a list of hosts, is
going to be an attractive attack vector. I think it was mentioned,
but a robust key management solution is necessary, at least for ssh,
but likely also for somethi
Other people make different choices than you.
That is great.
Imagine that! Especially if they have other priorities than you.
This as well, but I feel large side effects of these choice is being
hidden to the people that make them: the cost of maintaining
all of these different languages in
On Sun, Sep 24, 2017 at 11:08:23PM -0400, Rendov Norra wrote:
> The archive shows silence and positivity on threads with go in the subject.
> Unfortunately gmane is unusable, so there's no way to search bodies.
I guess everyone here is just too jaded to respond to those threads
anymore. Anytime s
> On Sep 22, 2017, at 5:45 AM, sylvain.bertr...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 10:35:26AM +0200, Kamil Cholewiński wrote:
>>> go is not suckless.
>>>
>>> Should have written your PoC using simple C.
>>
>> Does C magically solve my design problem?
>> At PoC stage, implementation lan
You forgot to shit about vulkan in your rampage. (/s)
Maybe you could be helpful and provide an idea for the problem Kamil is asking,
instead of ranting about not using C.
I still remember the words of arg, FRIGN & co after slcon4 stating that they'll
start moderating the community. All I've se
On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 02:25:54PM +0200, Laslo Hunhold wrote:
> On Fri, 22 Sep 2017 06:00:51 +
> sylvain.bertr...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> Hey Sylvain,
>
> > go is not suckless.
> >
> > Should have written your PoC using simple C.
>
> what are you talking about? Go is an adequate language for
On Fri, 22 Sep 2017 23:15:35 +0200
Kamil Cholewiński wrote:
> On Fri, 22 Sep 2017, Antenore Gatta wrote:
> > Well, I hope it's what you are looking for.
>
> It's totally not, but I see where you're coming from :)
>
> You may want to look at Ansible Tower, Rundeck, or similar stuff.
> They al
On Fri, 22 Sep 2017, Antenore Gatta wrote:
> Well, I hope it's what you are looking for.
It's totally not, but I see where you're coming from :)
You may want to look at Ansible Tower, Rundeck, or similar stuff.
They all suck, but they do solve this kind of problem in a much more
manageable manne
Back to real life with a real keyboard and a real system!!!
I keep the previous answer to have a context.
On Fri, 22 Sep 2017 16:21:08 +
Antenore wrote:
> >Now back to PrivEsc, I actually found Antenore's suggestion
> >inspiring. It would work if we could force only part of the command
> >to
>Now back to PrivEsc, I actually found Antenore's suggestion inspiring.
>It would work if we could force only part of the command to remain
>constant, and use the constant part to perform non-interactive
>authentication (e.g. by verifying a provided secret). Essentially
>delegate authentication to
I love how every discussin here eventually derails into "XYZ sucks".
Yes, XYZ sucks. But FGH sucks more. I want to do what FGH does, because
while FGH sucks, it solves a real-world problem.
Now back to PrivEsc, I actually found Antenore's suggestion inspiring.
It would work if we could force only
On Fri, 22 Sep 2017 06:00:51 +
sylvain.bertr...@gmail.com wrote:
Hey Sylvain,
> go is not suckless.
>
> Should have written your PoC using simple C.
what are you talking about? Go is an adequate language for certain
higher-level-applications.
The only beef I have about it is the large binar
On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 10:35:26AM +0200, Kamil Cholewiński wrote:
> > go is not suckless.
> >
> > Should have written your PoC using simple C.
>
> Does C magically solve my design problem?
> At PoC stage, implementation language absolutely does not matter.
> I'd write it in PL/SQL if that solved
> go is not suckless.
>
> Should have written your PoC using simple C.
Does C magically solve my design problem?
At PoC stage, implementation language absolutely does not matter.
I'd write it in PL/SQL if that solved the problem at hand.
<3,K.
> On Sep 22, 2017, at 2:00 AM, sylvain.bertr...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> go is not suckless.
Why not? I don't see the issue with go for occasional use or security critical
applications. Is go hard to maintain?
> Should have written your PoC using simple C.
>
> --
> Sylvain
>
go is not suckless.
Should have written your PoC using simple C.
--
Sylvain
> What about using custom public SSH keys that force the execution of a
> specific command/script instead of the default login shell?
The operational principle is that first you scp a script with arbitrary
content, written in an arbitrary language, to the remote box(es), then
execute the said scri
Sorry I'm on my mobile.
What about using custom public SSH keys that force the execution of a specific
command/script instead of the default login shell?
If you're interested I can give you more details later.
I've a suid script that is used instead of the login shell and it parses the
paramet
Hi list,
TL;DR: passwordless sudo is same as making $USER equal to root at all
times. Requiring a password is a royal PITA when trying to run one
command on many many hosts. Scripting interactive password input sucks.
Other methods are non-portable. Practical ideas?
Long version:
I've been worki
21 matches
Mail list logo
