libera/#devuan/ Sunday, 2024-06-02

ralphyThe suspend issue also is present on the old installation kernel 6.1.0.1000:27
ralphyOn the second installation I am upgrading now to Excalibur to see whats happening.00:30
rrqwhy does "cron" refuse to work if there is a hardlink to any of its configuration files? what's the danger with such a hadrlink?02:29
rrq.. and why should the s/w have code to worry about it?02:32
fluffywolfI don't have a full answer, but googling, it seems like a hardlink to it would allow anyone in the same group as cron to use it to run things as root?03:03
rrq?? how ??03:03
fluffywolfor the same user as any daemon with a crontab file, or something...03:04
fluffywolfI'm not sure.  I didn't think hardlinks could bypass permissions, but maybe they can?  lol03:04
rrqobviously anyone who can edit a confguration file can make it do whatever... but having hardlinks doesn;t change that one way or the other, does it?03:05
rrqand setting a hardlink requires root03:06
rrqthe03:08
rrqthe s/w has code to refuse if the hardlink count != 1... it's s/w patched in by debian (doesn;t exist in upstream)03:10
rrqhappend in 201503:10
fluffywolfit was done upstream in 2000 from what I've read.03:10
rrqmmm the debian project has it as a patch that was added in 201503:12
fluffywolfit seems like normal users could create hardlinks to the crontab in a place that some other privleged program could edit them, clobbering crontab with malicious content.  so a user hardlinks /tmp/anamethatadaemonwilluse to /etc/crontab.  the user still can't edit /tmp/anamethatadaemonwilluse.  but when a root-running daemon goes to write /tmp/anamethatadaemonwilluse, it instead overwrites crontab.03:13
fluffywolfthe user will, of course, make sure the daemon tries writing at least one line that looks like a valid crontab entry, so it gets run, as root...03:13
rrqbut only root can create a hardlink03:14
fluffywolfthere's actually a bug report that this hardlink check doesn't work nearly as well as it should, if the user can just delete the hardlink after crontab gets clobbered...03:14
fluffywolfno, all users can create hardlinks, it seems.03:15
fluffywolfI've never actually tried.  lol.  I always use symlinks.  but I just created one with a normal user account to check.03:15
rrqhmm yes; I could create a local hardlinks without problem03:17
rrqbut I can't link /etc/crontab03:17
fluffywolfthe permissions should be such that normal users can't hardlink to /etc/crontab; there's distro-specific bugs about poor permissions letting people hardlink to it, thus letting any user trip the anti-hardlink protection and disable cron.03:18
rrqso the argument is that in some broken systems, hardlinks to /etc/crontab is possible, and therefore cron should refuse to run03:20
fluffywolfbecause refusing to run and having cron break is preferable to privledge escalation attacks.03:21
rrqthat's backward thinking to me.. if the system is broken in that way there are many other things one could do...03:23
rrqwhy should just cron worry about it then?03:23
fluffywolfmy question is...  in what context did you find out this check exists?  :P03:24
rrqI made a snapshot of /etc03:24
rrqusing the good old "cp al"03:25
rrq"cp -al"03:25
fluffywolfheh, that's how a couple of the threads I found discovered it too...03:26
fluffywolfincluding a /etc in a container's directory with hardlinks and such03:26
rrq:) ... yes it would seem like a perfectly good way of creating a time series of a directory tree03:27
rrqbut (only!) cron gets upset03:28
fluffywolftime series?03:28
fluffywolfif you edit one, you edit all of them...  not exactly a record.  lol03:28
rrqit does rely on update-by-replace, yes ... so you're right about that03:29
rrqso I'll need to do differently... but it surprised me that cron was programmed in that way03:35
rrqstupid side-constraints that don't belong to its function03:35
rrqbut at least it doesn't use dbus yet...03:37
fluffywolfreading a thing from 2002, another factor is programs that monitor /tmp for old files and remove them...  if it declares a file to be old and deletes it, but the daemon that created it then attempts to use it further, that gives you an easy window for creating a hardlink that does evil.03:37
fluffywolfalso, implementations of mkstemp() using predictable names03:38
rrqnot sure how that breaks to uid/gid barrier03:41
fluffywolfif a daemon that runs as root owns/creates the tmpfile, it will have root access to whatever the hardlink points to, even if a regular user created the hardlink.03:43
fluffywolfit might be more of a theoretical attack than one widely used in the wild, but it does seem plausible.03:44
rrqbut the uid/gid cannot set the hardlink03:45
fluffywolf?03:46
rrqat I get "invalid cross-device link" as result when trying to set a link to a root-owned file in /tmp03:46
fluffywolfyour /tmp is probably tmpfs, and thus a different filesystem.  it's not always this way.03:48
rrqeven in /tmp I get "Operation not permitted"03:49
fluffywolfalso, there's protections to keep you from making evil hardlinks on modern systems.  lol03:49
fluffywolfmost of what I'm finding about this attack dates from 2000-2002 or so...03:49
rrqI can set a link in /tmp to one of same uid/gid but can't set one to root/root without being root03:50
rrqlooks like "bad hardlinks" are prohibited, which is good, but doesn;t support the idea that cron should have that code (refusing if there are hardlinks)03:51
fluffywolfhttps://docs.kernel.org/admin-guide/sysctl/fs.html#protected-hardlinks03:52
fluffywolfit's a modern linux feature03:52
fluffywolfwhile the same cron program has been used on everything (including bsds) since 1987 or so...03:53
rrqok. the git history starts at 199903:56
fluffywolfhttps://rachelbythebay.com/w/2022/03/15/link/  the second attack it mentions03:56
fluffywolfit does seem like the hardlink check in cron is unneeded on modern, correctly configured linux systems...  but the same upstream is used for older, incorrectly configured, and non-linux environments as well.03:57
fluffywolfit was originally implemented in 2000 from what I saw.03:57
rrqif a user can set a hardlink willy-nilly, can they also change permissions?04:01
fluffywolfand there's very, very rarely momentum for removing security checks that may be relevant on some systems and the drawbacks of the check are only observed by a few people trying to do weird things.  :P04:01
fluffywolfno, the hardlink still has the original permissions04:01
rrqdoesn't that then stop infusng badness into the file?04:04
fluffywolfthe trick is to name the hardlink something that a root program will write to04:05
fluffywolftons of things create files in /tmp, not all of them with unpredictable names.04:05
rrqand daemons trust files in /tmp?04:06
rrq... and on such a system you can hardlink /tmp/knowname to /bin/sh I guess04:07
fluffywolf*in theory*, they should use securely random files created with protections for race conditions.04:07
fluffywolfgetting a proper binary executable written to a temp file by a random daemon is a lot harder than getting one line that looks like a crontab entry somewhere in a file written...04:07
fluffywolfthe page I read earlier gave two examples of non-secure /tmp usage...  systems with a daemon that cleans old files combined with daemons that may use a file for longer than what it considers old, and systems where mkstemp() is predictable, or at least predictable enough you can spam thousands or tens of thousands of likely names at the right time.04:09
fluffywolfand then, of course, there's daemons that just use hardcoded names, but that's been considered insecure for long enough you don't see it anymore...04:10
fluffywolfthe example it gave was one that names temp files with a hash of the pid and the time; since you can look up the pid, and predict the time you'll trigger the daemon, you could spam a hardlink for every microsecond time in the range you were expecting, and it'd end up using one of them.04:11
rrqI suppose in general one could have that any daemon that writes to a file should first ensure that file not being hardlinked04:15
fluffywolfand avoid race conditions where you create the file after it does its checks and before it goes to create the file...  one page mentioned intentionally hammering the disk at the right moment to create a longer time window to exploit this...04:16
fluffywolf(attackers are clever!)04:16
fluffywolfstart a thousand threads to read random blocks, and the race condition window suddenly goes from a few cycles to a few seconds...04:17
rrqare you saying it's deemed impossible for the writer to be sure that its writing does not end up on some pre-existing file?04:19
fluffywolfor at least difficult enough that it should be given serious consideration.04:21
fluffywolfcheckiffilexists() createfile() is subject to the race condition problem04:22
fluffywolfyou can squeeze into that window and create it yourself04:22
fluffywolfeverything running as root these days should be creating completely unpredictably named files.04:23
rrqbut checking the link status would be after opening the file04:23
fluffywolfyeah, but that depends on every daemon doing it.04:24
rrqyes. pushing this to the reader is more flawed since it uses the content regardless of how it got there04:26
fluffywolfthe fact that there's like six different mechanisms to prevent these attacks shows that they were important at one point.  lol04:29
rrqyeah... thanks for sharing ... I may still hold the view that it's wrong, but in any case my approach to what I was doing needs to be different so I shouldn't stay bothered about it04:34
fluffywolfsome of it I already knew (I'm old enough to remember the days where /tmp naming conflicts were actually exploited), but everything cron-specific I just learned myself.  lol04:36
rwpHmm...  Maybe related?  https://bugs.debian.org/210467 CRON: Does not work with symlinks anymore (2003)04:39
fluffywolfrelated in that it's one of a large number of hardening steps over the years.04:43
rwpI almost always have / and /var and /home on different partitions.  That blocks any attempt at creating hardlinks to /etc/crontab04:54
rwpBut trying to create a hardlink where I think it should work I see that the Linux kernel blocks this due to one of the newer hardening limits.04:54
rwpBut I can't see why.  I can't see an attack that can make use of that ability.  So blocking it seems gratuitous.04:55
fluffywolfI think I mentioned several above...04:56
fluffywolfand linked to the docs on the linux protection04:56
rwpSorry.  I'm a little distracted here IRL.  I'll read through the scrollback when I get quiet time later tonight.04:57
rwpfluffywolf, I have read the scrollback and the proposed attacks are, keeping a copy of suid programs so that in the future if they become vulnerable one might still keep a copy.06:30
rwpThat's an interesting attack.  Which requires someone to have a writable location in which to store those files that sysadmin won't notice.  That's the tricky part.  Where on a multiuser machine like a corporate machine or a uni machine with multiple users would someone be able to stash linked setuid binaries that sysadmin would not notice?06:31
fluffywolfthat was just one of the attacks, not the one we spent the other 95% of the time talking about.  lol06:31
rwpOf course it does not matter on a personal laptop which is the one most likely to have such a spot.06:31
fluffywolftheir home directory?  a directory named "Powerpoint Presentation Backup 2021"?06:31
rwpWell...  The other attack was to link into a place that another root program, which is written stupidly, will do something totally vulnerable in.06:32
rwpI rather discounted that attack.06:32
fluffywolfyes.  that other attack is one that was exploited for a very long time.06:32
rwpAll programs that open temporary files should be using a "safe" way of opening a temporary file.  O_EXCL for one.06:32
fluffywolfmalicious stuff in /tmp was a real problem06:32
fluffywolfisn't that a GNUism?06:33
rwpAlso /tmp always has the sticky bit 't' set so that means if you don't own the file you can't remove the file.  So one would be stuffing a bunch of hardlinked setuid files there.  And I think sysadmin would notice that.  And /tmp is most usually on a different file system blocking that too.06:34
rwpO_EXCL a GNUism?06:34
fluffywolfyou're confusing "modern linux" with "all *nixes"...06:34
fluffywolfold linux had tons of insecure tempfile issues06:35
rwphttps://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/functions/open.html06:35
rwpOh sure...  If we go back to HP-UX days I could almost always find some security exploit in it.  But that's not a free software system.  It was impossible to get fixes fixed there.06:35
rwpI once had a trivially fixed bug I filed with a patch to a .h file only get fixed more than 10+ years after I filed it.06:36
fluffywolfhttps://capec.mitre.org/data/definitions/149.html06:37
rwp06:38
rwpCAPEC06:38
rwpCommon Attack Pattern Enumeration and Classification06:38
rwpA Community Resource for Identifying and Understanding Attacks06:38
rwp06:38
rwpNew to CAPEC? Start Here06:38
rwpHome > CAPEC List > CAPEC-149: Explore for Predictable Temporary File Names (Version 3.9)06:38
rwpID Lookup:06:38
rwp    Home06:38
rwp    Search06:38
rwp06:38
rwpOops.  Sorry.  irssi keybinding fail.06:38
rwpAnyway...  Predictable file names.  That means we have some program like Sendmail from 1985 or something which is definitely riddled with exploitable bugs.06:38
rwpAny program opening a temporary file should be using O_EXCL and if it doesn't then it's a bug.06:39
rwpAnd I was also going to complain that the CAPEC-149 uses such vague terms.  Predictable file names.  I really want to see a concrete example of a root priv program which is vulnerable to this problem.  So that it can be patched and fixed.06:41
fluffywolfhttps://www.cvedetails.com/cve/CVE-2021-46705/  lol, even grub2 has bugs for insecure /tmp files...  that one lets you use grub2 to clobber arbitrary files you link to...  from 2022...06:43
fluffywolfit may be a bug, but it's a thing that continues to happen to this day, in major packages that run as root.06:43
rwpAh...  Good concrete example!  The code for it is linked to here: https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=119047406:44
fluffywolfnot taking systemwide precautions is silly06:44
rwpThat's definitely a pretty buggy bit of code there!  Excellent example.06:45
fluffywolfthe topic above is whether cron itself should take its own protections, or rely on systemwide protections.06:45
rwpFor the lurkers the code is basically "> /var/tmp/grub2-cleanup-once" to create an empty file there.06:46
fluffywolfgiven as rrq managed to trip cron's protections accidentally, and there's bugs documented where you can DoS cron by hardlinking to crontabs ( like https://bugs.gentoo.org/164466 ), and that the same upstream is used on non-linux platforms, it seems reasonable that cron shouldn't just depend on the system.06:47
rwpI believe in the system wide protections.  So I don't think cron /needs/ to take gratuitous precautions.06:47
rwpBut cron by adding these gratuious checks opened itself up to the denial of service attack of that gentoo but 164466 which is that then if someone can ln then they can cause cron to decide to ignore the valid file.06:49
fluffywolfthe bugs show that default installs on some distros have, at least in the past, allowed hardlinking to crontabs, and thus cron's internal protection may have been protecting systems.06:49
fluffywolfbut if it didn't protect itself, you could, say, ln /var/tmp/grub2-cleanup-once /etc/crontab....  :P06:50
rwpMost laptop installs are all in one partition and before Linux added those restrictions to the system kernel back a few years ago it was possible to hardlink between etc and home in that case.06:50
rwpAgreed.  But then the bug is in grub not cron.06:50
rwpAnd it requires everything in one partition.  Something typical of laptops.  Something not typical on multiuser server systems.06:51
fluffywolfit's a mental bug to assume that everyone else will avoid bugs...06:51
rwpIf someone wants to shoot themself in the foot I say let them.  It will be a good experience for them.06:51
rwpIn any case Linux has been blocking this from happening for some time now.06:52
rwpI don't disable that protection but there is another protection that I think is totally bad and I do disable it.  fs.protected_regular06:53
fluffywolfthe cron upstream source is used *all over the place*, not just linux.06:53
rwpWhen set to 1 fs.protected_regular blocks open O_CREAT on files that we don't own in world writable sticky directories, unless they are owned by the owner of the directory.06:53
rwpThat's a convoluted bit of logic but the hole is that it does not block O_APPEND or O_TRUNC or chmod.  So root can still O_TRUNC and then O_APPEND and have no effect.06:54
rwpAnd of course root can chmod too bypassing the whole thing.  And if root uses "cp" to copy to the file then cp has this same effect too and doesn't even notice.  So the entire thing for fs.protected_regular is pretty silly.06:55
rwpIt is one of the things I trip over routinely so I always disable fs.protected_regular.06:56
fluffywolfoh well, it's now irrelevant, as systemd has taken over cron's job.  :P06:56
rwpThere is that!06:56
fluffywolfsupposedly debian (and everyone else's) cron is still based off the original 1992 source...06:57
rwpFor Vixie Cron Paul Vixie has orphaned it twenty years ago and has not made any updated release since.  All of the distros just coordinate patches upon it.06:58
rwpBut it's a mature bit of code and has no need of significant changes.  That doesn't mean people don't still dork with it though.06:58
rwpA few releases ago someone thought it was be a good idea if it complained if the cronjob did not exit 0.  Well...  Lots of cronjobs do not exit zero!  It opened a flood of noise across the unix-verse!06:59
rwpThat patch got reverted.  Thankfully.06:59
fluffywolfall the bsds and macos use vixie cron too, apparently06:59
rwpAnd just recently in Unstable someone decided to make "crontab -l" produce random colors in the listing output.  That was truly horride!06:59
fluffywolfit's reasonable for upstream not to assume linux...07:00
rwpFortunately that color patch was reverted too.  It was truly awful.07:00
rwpI find it really strange but yes the BSDs also use Vixie Cron too.  Mostly because it provides /etc/cron.d/* and the original BSD cron did not.07:00
rwpSystem V cron provided for /var/spool/cron/crontabs for user individual crontabs and did not provide /etc/crontab (IIRC).07:00
fluffywolfI have absolutely no idea how macos handles /tmp.  lol07:01
rwpBSD cron provided ONLY a /etc/crontab file and no user crontabs.07:01
rwpVixie Cron provided both of those and also provided /etc/cron.d/* system level files too.  And also things like @reboot and */2 and stuff.  So it was just a nice set of features.  So everyone picked it up.07:01
rwpRegarding Mac OS and /tmp it is a BSD kernel so BSD kernels assume a setgid bit setting on every directory.  So that's a little odd.  /tmp is group wheel so all files in /tmp are group wheel regardless of who created them.07:03
masonBSDish. It's Mach.07:03
rwpI believe it behaves the same with regard to directories though.  And also /tmp and /var/tmp are 't' bit sticky too which enables those behaviors.07:03
rwpSpeaking of different crons though doesn't Red Hat use one of the other crons?  It's dcron(?) or something?  Pretty sure they don't use vixie-cron there.07:05
fluffywolfhttps://www.cvedetails.com/cve/CVE-2020-8027/  openldap fixed tmpfile names...   https://www.cvedetails.com/cve/CVE-2020-1733/ no idea what ansible is, but fixed /tmp directories with no checking...  https://www.cvedetails.com/cve/CVE-2018-17955/ suse's yast, core of the system, fixed tmpfile names...  https://www.cvedetails.com/cve/CVE-2018-6705/  mcafee, supposedly improving security, instead insecure tmpfiles...07:09
fluffywolfhttps://www.cvedetails.com/cve/CVE-2012-2666/  lol, golang creates insecure tmpfiles and then runs them as scripts...07:11
fluffywolfso, yeah, tmp issues are still a thing with a variety of software.07:11
rwpAll of those predictable file names are bugs though.  Regardless of whether hardlinks are allowed or not.  They are fully exploitable without using hardlinks at all.07:13
masonfluffywolf: Funny thing, systemd provides PrivateTmp for this, but unlike what the name suggests, what it actually does is drop the whole process into a private filesystem namespace.07:13
fluffywolflooks like redhat uses "cronie"07:13
rwpOMG but RHEL takes forever to boot up and look to see what cron it is running!  It took all of this time to do it.  They are running cronie, which is actually a fork of vixie-cron it seems.07:14
fluffywolfand cronie is a fork of vixie07:14
rwpLooks like we were both digging into Red Hat at the same time.  :-)07:16
rwpBasically systemd saw Unix and said,  I love you!  You are perfect!  Now let me change every possible aspect of you!07:17
rwpI am sure though that systemd did something good.  I am sure it did.07:17
rwpDon't rush me.  Give me another few minutes.  I am sure I can think of something.  Eventually.07:18
masonrwp: There was something good I saw once.07:18
masonI'm forgetting what it was, but there was definitely something.07:18
fluffywolfcould be different amounts of soil moisture, could be thickness of topsoil over clay, could be composition of the topsoil, could be a lack of organic matter due to having less growing on it in the past, could be compacted, could be replacement fill from other construction, could be over-farmed and depleted, could be salty or high/low ph, ...07:18
fluffywolfgrr, wrong window07:18
rwpHa!  The other day I was sure someone was adding soil to my garden too.  The plot thickens!  :-)07:19
* rwp I hear icecream calling to me...07:20
fluffywolfsomeone in another channel was asking why things don't grow as well in one part of their yard, and I was pointing out it could be a whole lot of things.07:22
rwpAll of this while I thought we were in -offtopic and just now realized it was otherwise.  (oh well...)07:29
fluffywolfbbl, bedtime07:59
brocashelmneed help with this error for 4.18: xfce4-power-manager: symbol lookup error: xfce4-power-manager: undefined symbol: up_client_get_devices210:04
brocashelmi have tried reinstalling the whole suite, and nothing10:05
gnarfacemissing some acpi dependency maybe?10:07
brocashelmhmm... acpi is already installed on the laptop; i upgraded it from ascii to beowulf to chimaera to daedalus10:09
brocashelmi wonder if the usb wifi thing is causing this, as it gets faulty and i switch different usb ports (works fine if on other laptops)10:09
rrqcausing undefined symbol?10:12
rrqmy google friend points at a missing UpClient ... whatever that means10:13
gnarfaceyou did dist-upgrade not just upgrade right?10:15
gnarfacein general on a stable release, undefined symbol errors usually are fundamentally related to version mismatches10:17
gnarfacelike missing or partially upgraded packages, or maybe release/distro mix+matching10:17
brocashelmi did both upgrade and dist-upgrade each time10:34
brocashelmaptitude full-upgrade has no leads10:36
rrqwhat about: apt list --installed | grep -v /stable10:38
brocashelmsolved it by downgrading libupower-glib3 to 0.99.20-2 (from 1:0.99.4-4+devuan3) and reinstalling xfce4-power-manager10:44
brocashelmnow it works10:44
brocashelmi think this was a bug from ascii (apt thinks that version is newer) for upower10:45
brocashelmthanks10:46
gnarfaceah, yea probably10:57
gnarfaceno problem10:57
aritywhat to do? "locale: Cannot set LC_CTYPE to default locale: No such file or directory"11:03
xwindowsWhat is a full output of your `locale` command?11:04
xwindows(This looks like a symptom of one specifying nonexistent or non-installed locale; so the locale string in question has to be known first)11:08
arityxwindows yes i uncommented locale.gen en_US.utf811:11
aritywhen i installed i installed different locales11:11
aritywhat is the proper way to change locales11:12
brocashelmsudo dpkg-reconfigure locales11:12
aritythanks brocashelm11:12
brocashelmnp11:12
aritynice, i have problem with hdmi11:16
arityeverything working fine11:16
aritywait brb11:16
aritywhen i plug in hdmi cable to port the display says no signal11:23
aritythe laptop has optimus11:23
arityim on nvidia-driver11:23
xwindowsOnce it was plugged in, what does `xrandr --verbose` say?11:23
arityhttp://0x0.st/XqiG.txt11:23
aritywait i will post the output. the upper paste is lspci11:24
arityhttp://0x0.st/Xqik.txt11:25
xwindows"HDMI-1 disconnected", hm, you're sure about the cabling, right?11:26
arityxwindows yes11:26
aritywhen i dont plug in cable the monitor says11:26
arity "Check signal cable" but when i plug in the monitor goes blank and then says "No Signal"11:27
arityi think the Hdmi port is bad on the laptop11:27
xwindowsHave you ever getting it working before?11:28
arityyes like a month back the with void11:28
xwindowsAnd I saw both Intel card and Nvidia card on your `lspci` output; is this a mybrid graphics laptop?11:30
arityyes it is hybrid graphics11:30
arityoptimus11:30
arityim using nvidia-driver11:31
xwindowsI'm not familiar with Nvidia-Intel hybrid graphics setup, do they have an easy way to switch between Intel and Nvidia GPU?11:32
arityi understand,yes there is a way. i will see how to do it.11:33
xwindowsYou might have to wait for someone familar with Nvidia to answer.11:34
xwindowsI asked that because I have read some "rumors" that such hybrid graphics configuration requires the Nvidia GPU to be the active one for HDMI to work.11:35
xwindows(Don't quote me, I don't know jack about Nvidia)11:36
xwindowsBut if you don't have an easy way to test, then it might be better if someone who knows would shime in.11:36
arityyes you are right. thats how i did it before by making the nvidia default.11:37
xwindows(Side note for anyone else reading, this is where I head about the existence of such "rumors": https://www.linux.org/threads/hdmi-not-working-with-nvidia-gtx1050-on-ubuntu-18-04.24833/ )11:38
gnarfacearity: i can think of a few different things that can cause this... cables can go bad, especially the knock-off ones... nvidia drivers fail a lot... but the first thing you should check is plug in the monitor and actually try to enable it with xrandr; it may just be off by default, which i think is also expected behavior unless your window manager takes over and does stuff15:03
gnarfaceif it's not configured to actually send display output to that hdmi port, then dpms would turn off the monitor and it would say no signal, that would also be expected15:05
gnarfacebut if you check the xrandr man page it should be fairly easy to do, actually i think nvidia-settings has a gui that can do the same thing it just puts configurations in a different place15:06
systemdletechristmas in June?  I just looked at the changelog for the chimaera kernel updates--the list of fixes is almost endless!!!22:58
systemdleteis there a similar motherload coming down for daedalus?22:59
rwpI would expect that most of those have already been posted to Daedalus previously and Chimaera is catching up.23:05
systemdleteactually, upon closer inspection, it is giving me the history all the way back to 5.10.1!!!23:10
systemdleteso, nvm.  But it looks like there is still quite a few updates23:10
systemdleteyeah, I thought so, rwp.  Usually the older releases seem to get updated after the most current one, which makes sense.23:11
systemdleteRecently, I have started taking a closer look at updates/upgrades to see what they are all about.  I never did that in the past, so I am learning how these changelogs are arranged as I go.23:11
systemdletesorry for my foolish post here23:12
rwpMore people should look into the changes as they are posted.23:12
rwpSome of those are of the OMG variety that we know must be fixed immediately if not sooner.23:12
systemdleteI think it was gnarface who suggested I do so.23:13
rwpSome of those are of the variety, wait... that's not a bug or a vulnerability.  That's just someone messing with things.23:13
systemdleteI follow thehackernews.com a little bit, so I have some idea of what to expect.23:13
systemdlete"messing with things?"23:13
systemdletelike sifting in a malware bug or two here and there?23:14
systemdleteor more like, ooh ooh, I can re-wrte that to save 4 bytes.23:14
* systemdlete hopes others will excuse their sardonic attitude23:15
rwpPeople introduce "features" which I might call "thrash and churn".  They are not features I need.  I don't want them.  But now they are there.  And they introduce bugs.  Bugs introduce vulnerabilities.  But also there are bugs like "rm removed my file, that's a security vulnerabilty" but no it's not.23:15
systemdletehow much testing is done to these changes?  (Or do I NOT want to know, save my mental health?)23:16
systemdleteor is T*st*ng a word I should not use in public here?23:17

Generated by irclog2html.py 2.17.0 by Marius Gedminas - find it at https://mg.pov.lt/irclog2html/!