One more thought... Samba is Open Source, and I think you could make a case
that mature, established, widely-used open source software is generally
less exploitable than widely-used proprietary software of any age. The
reason for this being the fact that the source code is public.
With public
On Wed, Dec 15, 2021 at 9:02 AM Alejandro olivan Alvarez <
alejandro.olivan.alva...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Being a Linux-only user, I would add that, IMHO (and risking to be
> polemic) nothing is more secure regarding security fixes/updates on the SMB
> protocol than MS Itself (Windows server
On Dec 15, 2021, at 12:02, Alejandro olivan Alvarez
wrote:
> If you look at debian security repo packages notes, and you look for samba,
> you will find that, for the last vulnerability, found this 2021, only the
> packaged sources for Debian Stable, testing and Sid have being patched with
>
I would like to share some other thoughs here.
If you look at debian security repo packages notes, and you look for
samba, you will find that, for the last vulnerability, found this 2021,
only the packaged sources for Debian Stable, testing and Sid have being
patched with the fix uploaded in
On Dec 15, 2021, at 11:08, Bill Putney wrote:
> Or to paraphrase Nancy Reagan "Just say NO to Windows.”
>
Easy to say, but the awkward fact is that (AFAICT) nearly 100% of commercial
scheduler systems (music and traffic) are Windows-based. The only exception
that I know of (Jim Hardy’s
Hi.
I remember that issue in my early attempts to build debian Buster (then
stable release) packages for rivendell 3.x
Apparently, CentOS 7 (I guess that came from previous) shipped
versions/defaults for the building/linker environment allowed for math
libraries not needed to be declared in
On Dec 15, 2021, at 04:09, Andy Higginson wrote:
> Fred, is building some more security into the system something that could be
> incorporated into the Rivendell 4 build/setup while it is still in Beta?
As far as the installers are concerned, there are two main goals that we try to
achieve:
Le 10/12/2021 à 23:15, Tim Camp a écrit :
> I remember this coming up before and have found some discussion on it,
> but what is the final determination of what to do about pow10 in cae
> causing make to error out?
http://caspian.paravelsystems.com/pipermail/rivendell-dev/2018-July/026975.html
Or to paraphrase Nancy Reagan "Just say NO to Windows."
Let's look at solving this from the problem causing end. Hackers are
flying blind unless it's an inside the organization attack. Anything you
do to not be the normal Windoz way of doing things is going to make it
really hard for them to
On 12/15/21 10:16 AM, Andy Higginson wrote:
Hi,
Some interesting ideas here. One thing that I would say is that we
are not all networking experts.
This December my last CISCO certification ends, and I'm not going to
re-cert... and for a good reason: On the 10 years I've been working in
Hi,
Some interesting ideas here. One thing that I would say is that we are not all
networking experts. I have to admit that some of the stuff you are talking
about goes over my head. I've not had cause to look at AD in any scope. Would
it be possible to point us in the direction of a
Hi,
Reading through all of this, it sounds like it would be useful for there to be
a wider discussion over how to configure a Rivendell (or other) playout system
in a way that gives maximum protection to the audio network, whilst allowing
users to be able to access the Rivendell system to
Hi list.
I've been reading this very interesting case of vulnerability exploit
ending in disaster, in a Linux environment... with Samba around the
mess. I would like just to share some thoughts
My partners of Automation dptm. that work with Win Based Automation
systems, do often face the
13 matches
Mail list logo
