Lennart Poettering wants to get rid of sudo now, and replace it with a
new systemd feature called “run0” <https://itwire.com/business-it-news/open-source/poettering-announces-tool-in-new-systemd-version-to-replace-sudo.html>.
On 06/05/2024 00:17, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
Lennart Poettering wants to get rid of sudo now, and replace it with a
new systemd feature called “run0”
<https://itwire.com/business-it-news/open-source/poettering-announces-tool-in-new-systemd-version-to-replace-sudo.html>.
I wish he would stop reinventing wheels and making them square.
On 06/05/2024 00:17, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
Lennart Poettering wants to get rid of sudo now, and replace it with a
new systemd feature called “run0”
<https://itwire.com/business-it-news/open-source/poettering-announces-tool-in-new-systemd-version-to-replace-sudo.html>.
I wish he would stop reinventing wheels and making them square.
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
Lennart Poettering wants to get rid of sudo now, and replace it with a
new systemd feature called “run0”
I wish he would stop reinventing wheels and making them square.
That's generally my attitude to his work, but maybe this time run0 makes sense?
Nowadays you have to go out of your way to not be reliant on systemd,
which already has the ability to launch processes as specific users,
without cludgy setuid/sudo, so why not re-use it ...
Personally I'm more of a su user than sudo user, though I realise that
relies on trusting everyone who knows the root password, we managed on
every *nix box I was involved with.
On 5/6/2024 10:11 AM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Mon, 6 May 2024 08:24:18 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 06/05/2024 00:17, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
Lennart Poettering wants to get rid of sudo now, and replace it with a >>>> new systemd feature called “run0”
<https://itwire.com/business-it-news/open-source/poettering-announces-tool-in-new-systemd-version-to-replace-sudo.html>.
I wish he would stop reinventing wheels and making them square.
Unfortunately, the existing tool is far from perfect.
yes, but why integrate it all into his tool?
On Mon, 6 May 2024 08:24:18 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 06/05/2024 00:17, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
Lennart Poettering wants to get rid of sudo now, and replace it with a
new systemd feature called “run0”
<https://itwire.com/business-it-news/open-source/poettering-announces-tool-in-new-systemd-version-to-replace-sudo.html>.
I wish he would stop reinventing wheels and making them square.
Unfortunately, the existing tool is far from perfect.
"Square wheels are superior in that if they are prevented from
rotating there is more tyre in contact with the road"
Lennart Poettering
On 06/05/2024 09:11, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Mon, 6 May 2024 08:24:18 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 06/05/2024 00:17, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
Lennart Poettering wants to get rid of sudo now, and replace it with a >>>> new systemd feature called “run0”
<https://itwire.com/business-it-news/open-source/poettering-announces-tool-in-new-systemd-version-to-replace-sudo.html>.
I wish he would stop reinventing wheels and making them square.
Unfortunately, the existing tool is far from perfect.
Yebbut nobut making it square has a bad knock on effects elsewhere.
Simply fit better brakes or something
"Square wheels are superior in that if they are prevented from rotating
there is more tyre in contact with the road"
Lennart Poettering
On 5/6/2024 12:42 PM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 06/05/2024 09:50, Kyonshi wrote:
On 5/6/2024 10:11 AM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Mon, 6 May 2024 08:24:18 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 06/05/2024 00:17, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
Lennart Poettering wants to get rid of sudo now, and replace it
with a
new systemd feature called “run0”
<https://itwire.com/business-it-news/open-source/poettering-announces-tool-in-new-systemd-version-to-replace-sudo.html>.
I wish he would stop reinventing wheels and making them square.
Unfortunately, the existing tool is far from perfect.
yes, but why integrate it all into his tool?
So his 'tool' gets to be bigger than anyone else's, and he can wave it
around boastfully.
Why not create his own OS? Worked for Linus after all.
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> writes:
"Square wheels are superior in that if they are prevented from
rotating there is more tyre in contact with the road"
Lennart Poettering
Hackaday
Square-Wheeled Bike Is Actually An Amazing Tracked Build <https://hackaday.com/2023/04/13/square-wheeled-bike-is-actually-an-amazing-tracked-build/>
That's generally my attitude to his work, but maybe this time run0
makes sense?
Nowadays you have to go out of your way to not be reliant on systemd,
which already has the ability to launch processes as specific users,
without cludgy setuid/sudo, so why not re-use it ...
Personally I'm more of a su user than sudo user, though I realise
that relies on trusting everyone who knows the root password, we
managed on every *nix box I was involved with.
Why not create his own OS? Worked for Linus after all.
For casual personal use to do one thing, sudo is fine.
For specific tasks by users on a multiuser machine sudo is well controlled
For doing engine out maintenance by skilled personnel, its a sodding encumbrance.
On 5/6/2024 12:42 PM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 06/05/2024 09:50, Kyonshi wrote:
On 5/6/2024 10:11 AM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Mon, 6 May 2024 08:24:18 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 06/05/2024 00:17, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
Lennart Poettering wants to get rid of sudo now, and replace it
with a
new systemd feature called “run0”
<https://itwire.com/business-it-news/open-source/poettering-announces-tool-in-new-systemd-version-to-replace-sudo.html>.
I wish he would stop reinventing wheels and making them square.
Unfortunately, the existing tool is far from perfect.
yes, but why integrate it all into his tool?
So his 'tool' gets to be bigger than anyone else's, and he can wave it
around boastfully.
Why not create his own OS? Worked for Linus after all.
Nowadays you have to go out of your way to not be reliant on systemd,
which already has the ability to launch processes as specific users,
without cludgy setuid/sudo, so why not re-use it ...
Personally I'm more of a su user than sudo user, though I realise that
relies on trusting everyone who knows the root password, we managed on
every *nix box I was involved with.
On 5/6/2024 10:11 AM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
Unfortunately, the existing tool is far from perfect.
yes, but why integrate it all into his tool?
Yebbut nobut making it square has a bad knock on effects elsewhere.
For specific tasks by users on a multiuser machine sudo is well
controlled For doing engine out maintenance by skilled personnel, its a sodding encumbrance.
AFAIR, /usr/bin/sudo is a 'sticky' binary owned by root, so it
immediately gets root access, better hope nobody finds a way to abuse
that before it's decided whether or not to let you do what you asked it.
I've encountered plenty, not so well controlled, where all it takes is
"sudo su -"
yeti <yeti@tilde.institute> wrote:
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> writes:
"Square wheels are superior in that if they are prevented from
rotating there is more tyre in contact with the road"
Lennart Poettering
Hackaday
Square-Wheeled Bike Is Actually An Amazing Tracked Build
<https://hackaday.com/2023/04/13/square-wheeled-bike-is-actually-an-amazing-tracked-build/>
Now that is interesting :)
Let those stick with su/sudo/setuid
I've always been uneasy about pam, if just for the potental complexity
of config
Never encountered it.
Nowadays you have to go out of your way to not be reliant on systemd,
which already has the ability to launch processes as specific users,
without cludgy setuid/sudo, so why not re-use it ...
Personally I'm more of a su user than sudo user, though I realise that
relies on trusting everyone who knows the root password, we managed on
every *nix box I was involved with.
On Mon, 6 May 2024 11:41:38 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
For specific tasks by users on a multiuser machine sudo is well
controlled For doing engine out maintenance by skilled personnel, its a
sodding encumbrance.
Pro tip: one of the commands you can feed to sudo is “/bin/bash”.
Pro tip: one of the commands you can feed to sudo is “/bin/bash”.
Grant Taylor wrote:
systemd-run / run0 can't do crap on systems that aren't running systemd.
Systems like Linux distros avoiding systemd; Solaris, AIX, HP-UX,
OpenServer, UnixWare, OpenMVS, etc.
Let those stick with su/sudo/setuid
On Mon, 6 May 2024 11:39:13 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Yebbut nobut making it square has a bad knock on effects elsewhere.
You’re one of those people who type “sudo su”, aren’t you?
On 2024-05-06, John McCue <jmccue@magnetar.jmcunx.com> wrote:
yeti <yeti@tilde.institute> wrote:
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> writes:
"Square wheels are superior in that if they are prevented from
rotating there is more tyre in contact with the road"
Lennart Poettering
Hackaday
Square-Wheeled Bike Is Actually An Amazing Tracked Build
<https://hackaday.com/2023/04/13/square-wheeled-bike-is-actually-an-amazing-tracked-build/>
Now that is interesting :)
It'd be even more interesting if the video were watchable.
On 2024-05-07 01:18, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
On 2024-05-06, John McCue <jmccue@magnetar.jmcunx.com> wrote:
yeti <yeti@tilde.institute> wrote:
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> writes:
"Square wheels are superior in that if they are prevented from
rotating there is more tyre in contact with the road"
Lennart Poettering
Hackaday
Square-Wheeled Bike Is Actually An Amazing Tracked Build
<https://hackaday.com/2023/04/13/square-wheeled-bike-is-actually-an-amazing-tracked-build/>
Now that is interesting :)
It'd be even more interesting if the video were watchable.
Works here just fine.
Unfortunately, the existing tool [sudo] is far from perfect.
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <...@nz.invalid> [LD]:
Unfortunately, the existing tool [sudo] is far from perfect.
Will Deich has written a nice sudo alternative, called "super", with
lots of bells and whistles.
On 07/05/2024 08:34, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2024-05-07 01:18, Charlie Gibbs wrote:Well the video works.
On 2024-05-06, John McCue <jmccue@magnetar.jmcunx.com> wrote:
yeti <yeti@tilde.institute> wrote:
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> writes:
"Square wheels are superior in that if they are prevented from
rotating there is more tyre in contact with the road"
Lennart Poettering
Hackaday
Square-Wheeled Bike Is Actually An Amazing Tracked Build
<https://hackaday.com/2023/04/13/square-wheeled-bike-is-actually-an-amazing-tracked-build/>
Now that is interesting :)
It'd be even more interesting if the video were watchable.
Works here just fine.
It does seem to be about as pointless as Poettering's ideas though.
On 5/6/24 14:08, Andy Burns wrote:
I've encountered plenty, not so well controlled, where all it takes
is "sudo su -"
That's why I would tend to allow non-SA teams to have sudo with a
specific command (possibly without needing to re-enter their password)
while only allowing the Unix SAs to have `sudo su` et al. access.
On Mon, 6 May 2024 11:41:38 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
For specific tasks by users on a multiuser machine sudo is well
controlled For doing engine out maintenance by skilled personnel, its a
sodding encumbrance.
Pro tip: one of the commands you can feed to sudo is “/bin/bash”.
Fritz Wuehler <fritz@spamexpire-202405.rodent.frell.theremailer.net>
wrote:
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <...@nz.invalid> [LD]:
Unfortunately, the existing tool [sudo] is far from perfect.
Will Deich has written a nice sudo alternative, called "super", with
lots of bells and whistles.
And there is also doas, which less bells and whistles (which is what I
would want for a suid program), from the BSD world.
Greetings
Marc (who maintains sudo in Debian and is thus stuck with sudo)
That's basically the same as sudo su.. unless the root user's shell
was changed.
Since you are the expert witness... what is the point of OpenBSD:s doas >instead of sudo? If the two were to battle to the death with the lirpa,
which one would win?
I think this is optimistic at best.
One reason is the difficulty of writing correct setuid
programs. sudo’s CVE record shows how hard this is (as if there were
any doubt by now). Some of the historical CVEs stem from it being
written in C but for others the implementation language doesn’t
seem to be very relevant.
The other is that impracticality of ensuring the the commands you
want to run don’t allow further escalation. Of course you may be
auditing all the commands you permit in this way but realistically,
most people doing this aren’t.
Some of these issues translate to any other strategy for managing
privilege escalation (there is no free lunch); others don’t.
Certainly getting the escalated process out of the calling user’s environment, as run0 does, is a real improvement. Being able to
remove setuid/setgid programs from Linux would be a big step forward
in security terms.
I am wondering why people are so darn creative to work around a simple
sudo -i.
On 2024-05-07 01:18, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
On 2024-05-06, John McCue <jmccue@magnetar.jmcunx.com> wrote:
yeti <yeti@tilde.institute> wrote:
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> writes:
"Square wheels are superior in that if they are prevented from
rotating there is more tyre in contact with the road"
Lennart Poettering
Hackaday
Square-Wheeled Bike Is Actually An Amazing Tracked Build
<https://hackaday.com/2023/04/13/square-wheeled-bike-is-actually-an-amazing-tracked-build/>
Now that is interesting :)
It'd be even more interesting if the video were watchable.
Works here just fine.
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote at 22:00 this Monday (GMT):
Pro tip: one of the commands you can feed to sudo is “/bin/bash”.
That's basically the same as sudo su..
On 5/7/24 10:29, Richard Kettlewell wrote:
Certainly getting the escalated process out of the calling user’s
environment, as run0 does, is a real improvement. Being able to
remove setuid/setgid programs from Linux would be a big step forward
in security terms.
I don't agree that removing setuid / setgid binaries from systems is
the panacea some make it out to be.
I also suspect that we may be looking at sudo, et al, slightly
differently.
All of the use cases we had at my previous employer were business
justifiable (as in the business benefited from people running the
commands) and had multiple layers of management approval / blessing
for the requestor to be able to run them.
So sudo really was a way to conveniently provide the approved commands without the requestor needing to go through the hassle of checking the
shared password out of a database, logging in as the target user,
running the necessary commands, logging out, and ensuring that the
password was rotated.
Sudo was really a way to make it easier for people to access the
privileges that they had already been granted.
The more people that need to access a shared account, the more benefit
there is in them not utilizing the shared password for everything.
For casual personal use to do one thing, sudo is fine.
For specific tasks by users on a multiuser machine sudo is well controlled For doing engine out maintenance by skilled personnel, its a sodding encumbrance.
The important part of
the model in which sudo grants access to certain commands only is that
it doesn’t let anyone go beyond those specifically granted privileges.
On 5/6/2024 3:41 AM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
For casual personal use to do one thing, sudo is fine.
For specific tasks by users on a multiuser machine sudo is well controlled >> For doing engine out maintenance by skilled personnel, its a sodding
encumbrance.
There is always "sudo -i" ...
FSVO "works". If you consider "works" as force-feeding you
interminable ads (as per YouTube's new model), then great.
I have better things to do than wait around for that garbage.
No matter - at least I got a glimpse of the photo before it
got whisked away. It sounds like a fun idea.
On 5/7/24 11:00, candycanearter07 wrote:
That's basically the same as sudo su.. unless the root user's shell was
changed.
Chuckle.
That's a very Linux / FreeBSD centric answer.
Most of the platforms that I used sudo on didn't have bash installed. Most of them had root's shell set to /bin/sh.
People were more likely to sudo /bin/ksh
D <nospam@example.net> wrote:
Since you are the expert witness... what is the point of OpenBSD:s doas
instead of sudo? If the two were to battle to the death with the lirpa,
which one would win?
runas is much simpler and thus has less attack surface. Sudo has a
complex parser of a historically grown configuration file format, a
plugin interface. I'd rather not have that in a suid root binary.
When I took over sudo maintenance in Debian, I was strongly
considering to migrate my own systems to doas because of the smaller
attack surface, but than decided that I need to eat my own dog food
and stayed with sudo.
Greetings
Marc
I don’t think I said “panacea”. But it’s pretty obvious that eliminating
them would close down an entire attack class. That’s worth a lot, and
steps toward it should be welcomed.
On 5/7/24 01:59, Marc Haber wrote:
I am wondering why people are so darn creative to work around a simple sudo >> -i.
Inertia and or not knowing about `sudo -i`.
On 5/7/24 11:00, candycanearter07 wrote:
That's basically the same as sudo su.. unless the root user's shell
was changed.
Chuckle.
That's a very Linux / FreeBSD centric answer.
Most of the platforms that I used sudo on didn't have bash installed.
Most of them had root's shell set to /bin/sh.
People were more likely to sudo /bin/ksh
On Tue, 7 May 2024 16:00:10 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07 wrote:
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote at 22:00 this Monday (GMT):
Pro tip: one of the commands you can feed to sudo is “/bin/bash”.
That's basically the same as sudo su..
Let’s see: you create a process to run sudo, which does privilege checks and creates a process to run su, which runs privilege checks and spawns
your actual command.
I just checked, and for some reason sudo itself needs two processes to do
its stuff. So that’s *three* processes, not including your actual command.
In my case intertia _and_ not knowing about sudo -i.
On 07/05/2024 23:01, Richard Kettlewell wrote:
I don’t think I said “panacea”. But it’s pretty obvious that
eliminating them would close down an entire attack class. That’s
worth a lot, and steps toward it should be welcomed.
How many serious attacks have been successfully launched using 'sudo'?
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> writes:
On 07/05/2024 23:01, Richard Kettlewell wrote:
I don’t think I said “panacea”. But it’s pretty obvious that
eliminating them would close down an entire attack class. That’s
worth a lot, and steps toward it should be welcomed.
How many serious attacks have been successfully launched using 'sudo'?
Obviously impossible to say.
On 5/8/24 04:52, D wrote:
In my case intertia _and_ not knowing about sudo -i.
I used `sudo` for years before I learned about `sudo -i`.
On 2024-05-08 17:51, Grant Taylor wrote:
On 5/8/24 04:52, D wrote:
In my case intertia _and_ not knowing about sudo -i.
I used `sudo` for years before I learned about `sudo -i`.
Mmm? What is the advantage? I also don't know about it. Why should I use it?
How many serious attacks have been successfully launched using 'sudo'?
A more senior consultant at that time, told me he always installed some private guys gnu utils on every AIX machine he administered.
I remember thinking that it did feel a bit insecure ...
On 5/8/24 04:52, D wrote:
In my case intertia _and_ not knowing about sudo -i.
I used `sudo` for years before I learned about `sudo -i`.
Richard Kettlewell wrote:
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> writes:
On 07/05/2024 23:01, Richard Kettlewell wrote:Obviously impossible to say.
I don’t think I said “panacea”. But it’s pretty obvious that
eliminating them would close down an entire attack class. That’s
worth a lot, and steps toward it should be welcomed.
How many serious attacks have been successfully launched using 'sudo'?
How many serious attacks have been detected and were successfully
launched using 'sudo'?
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> writes:
Richard Kettlewell wrote:
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> writes:
On 07/05/2024 23:01, Richard Kettlewell wrote:Obviously impossible to say.
I don’t think I said “panacea”. But it’s pretty obvious that >>>>> eliminating them would close down an entire attack class. That’s
worth a lot, and steps toward it should be welcomed.
How many serious attacks have been successfully launched using
'sudo'?
How many serious attacks have been detected and were successfully
launched using 'sudo'?
Again, obviously impossible to say.
I don’t have any more access to incident reports from targets (or
attackers l-) than you do. What I can do in their absence is assess the
risk associated with various APIs, components, configurations, etc,
based on understanding of how they work, direct and indirect experience
over the last few decades, and so on. Reasonable people can certainly disagree about that assessment but the poor availability of evidence of actual compromises is a hopeless foundation for any conclusions.
I have not worked in a single environment where the root password was
common knowledge.
All environments I have worked in used personalized sudo to escalate privileges. One even (the best one!) encouraged people not to escalate
to a root shell but type sudo for every single command as this leaves
a nice audit trail.
Doing so is considerably easier on Debianesque systems than in the
Red Hat world due to the more open directory permissions in Debian.
Reminds me of when I was administering a bunch of power servers with AIX
on them. No bash as far as the eye could see.
A more senior consultant at that time, told me he always installed
some private guys gnu utils on every AIX machine he administered.
I remember thinking that it did feel a bit insecure, but that was
the way they did it.
Is it so hard to read the docs?
Mmm? What is the advantage?
I also don't know about it. Why should I use it?
~/bin/sudo.wrapper so that I can simply type `ifconfig` as my userand it's run with sudo. It's also authenticated by my ssh key so I'm
On 5/8/24 01:27, Marc Haber wrote:
Doing so is considerably easier on Debianesque systems than in the
Red Hat world due to the more open directory permissions in Debian.
Please elaborate.
On 5/8/24 13:32, Carlos E.R. wrote:
Mmm? What is the advantage?
It really depends on what command you do use and what the target user's account is configured with.
`sudo -i` starts the target user's login shell directly. So it might be comparable to `sudo bash` if the target user's shell is bash, but will
be different if the target user doesn't have bash as their default shell.
I have aliases `si` to `sudo -i` and `s` to `sudo`. So `si` and `s` are shorter to type and I prefer them.
I also don't know about it. Why should I use it?
I went on a bit of an embrace and extend sudo to make it streamlined for
the environments that I work in.
I've also configured sudo on my personal systems to be able to
authenticate to sudo with my ssh key.
I've also created a wrapper that I have in my ~/bin directory that keys
off of $0 as to what command to pass to sudo. So I have ~/bin/ifconfig
~/bin/sudo.wrapper so that I can simply type `ifconfig` as my userand it's run with sudo. It's also authenticated by my ssh key so I'm
not prompted for a password.
I'm embracing sudo and making it work for -> do things for me in a way
that I don't even need to think about it.
I'd have to stop and think about how much, if any, of that could be
replaced with something other than sudo. But seeing as how sudo is
standard on the Linux, FreeBSD, Solaris, and AIX systems I work with,
I'm somewhat reluctant to find an alternative. Though I do try to keep
an open mind and learn about other options.
On 5/8/24 15:07, Marc Haber wrote:
Is it so hard to read the docs?
Docs probably don't give first hand real world use cases like I just provided.
On Wed, 8 May 2024 11:53:57 +0200, D wrote:
A more senior consultant at that time, told me he always installed some
private guys gnu utils on every AIX machine he administered.
Every seasoned Unix sysadmin had the tradition of doing that.
I remember thinking that it did feel a bit insecure ...
Why? Unix folks preferred the GNU tools because they tended to be of
higher quality than the vendor-proprietary stuff.
On 5/8/24 04:53, D wrote:
Reminds me of when I was administering a bunch of power servers with AIX on >> them. No bash as far as the eye could see.
Yep.
A more senior consultant at that time, told me he always installed some
private guys gnu utils on every AIX machine he administered.
If I have the option I prefer to install sudo (not all systems I administer have it, but most do), Zsh, vim, and git. That encompasses most of my interactive shell environment and allows me to feel at home. -- HOWEVER, I do so through proper change approval process. I don't do it if it's not approved.
I remember thinking that it did feel a bit insecure, but that was the way
they did it.
I don't know. It would be highly situationally dependent. The security is only one aspect. A manageable an modicum of risk may be well worth it if the tool helps reduce errors and / or makes things considerably faster.
Contrary to what a co-worker thinks and says, a LOT of GNU tools are installed by default with the AIX Base OS (BOS) from IBM. More are included as optional components. If it was something on the DVDs from IBM, it's probably okay. My co-worker derogatorily refers to it as "shareware" with disdain in his voice. I haven't pointed out to him yet that ssh is what he calls shareware.
On Wed, 8 May 2024 10:58:32 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
How many serious attacks have been successfully launched using 'sudo'?
https://www.cvedetails.com/vulnerability-list/vendor_id-15714/Sudo-Project.html
On 5/8/24 13:32, Carlos E.R. wrote:[snip]
Mmm? What is the advantage?
It really depends on what command you do use and what the target user's account is configured with.
`sudo -i` starts the target user's login shell directly. So it might be comparable to `sudo bash` if the target user's shell is bash, but will
be different if the target user doesn't have bash as their default shell.
I have aliases `si` to `sudo -i` and `s` to `sudo`. So `si` and `s` are shorter to type and I prefer them.
I also don't know about it. Why should I use it?
I went on a bit of an embrace and extend sudo to make it streamlined for
the environments that I work in.
I've also configured sudo on my personal systems to be able to
authenticate to sudo with my ssh key.
I've also created a wrapper that I have in my ~/bin directory that keys
off of $0 as to what command to pass to sudo. So I have ~/bin/ifconfig
~/bin/sudo.wrapper so that I can simply type `ifconfig` as my userand it's run with sudo. It's also authenticated by my ssh key so I'm
not prompted for a password.
On 08/05/2024 21:49, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Wed, 8 May 2024 10:58:32 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
How many serious attacks have been successfully launched using 'sudo'?
https://www.cvedetails.com/vulnerability-list/vendor_id-15714/Sudo-Project.html
So the answer is none. These are all possible attack vectors, not successfully used attack vectors.
On Wed, 8 May 2024, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Wed, 8 May 2024 11:53:57 +0200, D wrote:Because I thought that the private guy who hosted them ...
A more senior consultant at that time, told me he always installed
some private guys gnu utils on every AIX machine he administered.
Every seasoned Unix sysadmin had the tradition of doing that.
I remember thinking that it did feel a bit insecure ...
Why? Unix folks preferred the GNU tools because they tended to be of
higher quality than the vendor-proprietary stuff.
Wouldn't it still try to call itself?
Really fascinating solution otherwise, though.
I might implement that myself.
Try doing sudo vim /path/to/some/dir/*.conf on a directory that isn't
world readable. Compare with the result in a world readable directory.
On 5/9/24 02:07, Marc Haber wrote:
Try doing sudo vim /path/to/some/dir/*.conf on a directory that isn't
world readable. Compare with the result in a world readable directory.
I take it you're referring to the expansion of *.conf to the actual file
name vs providing said file name on the command line.
On Thu, 9 May 2024 11:29:13 +0200, D wrote:
On Wed, 8 May 2024, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Wed, 8 May 2024 11:53:57 +0200, D wrote:Because I thought that the private guy who hosted them ...
A more senior consultant at that time, told me he always installed
some private guys gnu utils on every AIX machine he administered.
Every seasoned Unix sysadmin had the tradition of doing that.
I remember thinking that it did feel a bit insecure ...
Why? Unix folks preferred the GNU tools because they tended to be of
higher quality than the vendor-proprietary stuff.
You could have got them from the FSF itself, and its list of reputable mirrors. That was a thing in those days.
On Thu, 9 May 2024 13:01:21 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 08/05/2024 21:49, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Wed, 8 May 2024 10:58:32 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
How many serious attacks have been successfully launched using 'sudo'?
https://www.cvedetails.com/vulnerability-list/vendor_id-15714/Sudo-Project.html
So the answer is none. These are all possible attack vectors, not
successfully used attack vectors.
Is that your policy on how to run a secure system?
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
On 09/05/2024 23:49, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
Try telling that to climate change [scientists]...
On Thu, 9 May 2024, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Thu, 9 May 2024 11:29:13 +0200, D wrote:
On Wed, 8 May 2024, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Wed, 8 May 2024 11:53:57 +0200, D wrote:Because I thought that the private guy who hosted them ...
A more senior consultant at that time, told me he always installed
some private guys gnu utils on every AIX machine he administered.
Every seasoned Unix sysadmin had the tradition of doing that.
I remember thinking that it did feel a bit insecure ...
Why? Unix folks preferred the GNU tools because they tended to be of
higher quality than the vendor-proprietary stuff.
You could have got them from the FSF itself, and its list of reputable
mirrors. That was a thing in those days.
I could not, because it is in the past and therefore I cannot change
what happened. I was instructed to download it from that site and that
is on what what my personal anecdote rests.
What could or could not have been done is irrelevant to my story.
On Fri, 10 May 2024 17:16:15 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 09/05/2024 23:49, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
Try telling that to climate change [scientists]...
They have evidence. You don’t.
On 10/05/2024 22:24, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Fri, 10 May 2024 17:16:15 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 09/05/2024 23:49, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
Try telling that to climate change [scientists]...
They have evidence. You don’t.
Do they?
Look closer.
Evidence of what, exactly?
On Sat, 11 May 2024 09:00:27 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 10/05/2024 22:24, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Fri, 10 May 2024 17:16:15 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 09/05/2024 23:49, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
Try telling that to climate change [scientists]...
They have evidence. You don’t.
Do they?
Look closer.
Evidence of what, exactly?
Says the one with their eyes closed.
On Fri, 10 May 2024 11:38:48 +0200, D wrote:
On Thu, 9 May 2024, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Thu, 9 May 2024 11:29:13 +0200, D wrote:
On Wed, 8 May 2024, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Wed, 8 May 2024 11:53:57 +0200, D wrote:Because I thought that the private guy who hosted them ...
A more senior consultant at that time, told me he always installed >>>>>> some private guys gnu utils on every AIX machine he administered.
Every seasoned Unix sysadmin had the tradition of doing that.
I remember thinking that it did feel a bit insecure ...
Why? Unix folks preferred the GNU tools because they tended to be of >>>>> higher quality than the vendor-proprietary stuff.
You could have got them from the FSF itself, and its list of reputable
mirrors. That was a thing in those days.
I could not, because it is in the past and therefore I cannot change
what happened. I was instructed to download it from that site and that
is on what what my personal anecdote rests.
You had concerns about doing so, yet you didn’t raise them at the time?
What could or could not have been done is irrelevant to my story.
Not sure what the point of your story is, then: you did something questionable, and there is nothing to learn from that?
On Fri, 10 May 2024 17:16:15 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 09/05/2024 23:49, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
Try telling that to climate change [scientists]...
They have evidence. You don’t.
On Fri, 10 May 2024, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Fri, 10 May 2024 17:16:15 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 09/05/2024 23:49, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
Try telling that to climate change [scientists]...
They have evidence. You don’t.
No they don't. Seriously, they don't. I think you are trapped by the eco-fascist propaganda Lawrence.
On 11/05/2024 09:47, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Sat, 11 May 2024 09:00:27 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 10/05/2024 22:24, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Fri, 10 May 2024 17:16:15 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 09/05/2024 23:49, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
Try telling that to climate change [scientists]...
They have evidence. You don’t.
Do they?
Look closer.
Evidence of what, exactly?
Says the one with their eyes closed.
Better that than a closed mind eh Lawrence ;-)
On 11/05/2024 10:31, D wrote:
On Fri, 10 May 2024, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Fri, 10 May 2024 17:16:15 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 09/05/2024 23:49, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
Try telling that to climate change [scientists]...
They have evidence. You don’t.
No they don't. Seriously, they don't. I think you are trapped by the
eco-fascist propaganda Lawrence.
And that is the problem. There is a conjecture - one of many possible - that purports to explain the 'facts'.
But the problem of induction, means that there are an infinite number of conjectures that could explain the data, even if the data was clean, plentiful and unambiguous, which it isn't.
And the current conjecture fits the data so badly that its excused by the fallacious 'precautionary principle' to justify doing stuff that cannot work 'in case' they are in fact right.
Another conjecture, that they dont understand how climate works at all, and something else is in play, is simply disregarded, because it doesn't lead to sales of greenCrap™ and research money for academics.
Turkeys don't vote for Christmas and 'climate scientists' don't vote for 'natural causes'.
Nor do the mass of ArtStudents who have leapt on the media bandwagon or the companies that sell greenCrap or the politicians trying to make careers out of it.
Its a trillion dollar boondoggle.
All based on just one conjecture, that has in fact been demonstrated to be false.
A most convenient lie, however.
On Fri, 10 May 2024, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Fri, 10 May 2024 17:16:15 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:No they don't. Seriously, they don't.
On 09/05/2024 23:49, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
Try telling that to climate change [scientists]...
They have evidence. You don’t.
On 11/05/2024 09:47, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Sat, 11 May 2024 09:00:27 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 10/05/2024 22:24, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Fri, 10 May 2024 17:16:15 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 09/05/2024 23:49, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
Try telling that to climate change [scientists]...
They have evidence. You don’t.
Do they?
Look closer.
Evidence of what, exactly?
Says the one with their eyes closed.
Better that than a closed mind ...
On Sat, 11 May 2024, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 11/05/2024 10:31, D wrote:
On Fri, 10 May 2024, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Fri, 10 May 2024 17:16:15 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 09/05/2024 23:49, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
Try telling that to climate change [scientists]...
They have evidence. You don’t.
No they don't. Seriously, they don't. I think you are trapped by the
eco-fascist propaganda Lawrence.
And that is the problem. There is a conjecture - one of many possible
- that purports to explain the 'facts'.
But the problem of induction, means that there are an infinite number
of conjectures that could explain the data, even if the data was
clean, plentiful and unambiguous, which it isn't.
And the current conjecture fits the data so badly that its excused by
the fallacious 'precautionary principle' to justify doing stuff that
cannot work 'in case' they are in fact right.
Another conjecture, that they dont understand how climate works at
all, and something else is in play, is simply disregarded, because it
doesn't lead to sales of greenCrap™ and research money for academics.
Turkeys don't vote for Christmas and 'climate scientists' don't vote
for 'natural causes'.
Nor do the mass of ArtStudents who have leapt on the media bandwagon
or the companies that sell greenCrap or the politicians trying to make
careers out of it.
Its a trillion dollar boondoggle.
All based on just one conjecture, that has in fact been demonstrated
to be false.
A most convenient lie, however.
Wow, way more articulate than I usually see. Do you have a blog or
something where you expand on your brief summary above?
Also, honest question, why do you think the precautionary principle is fallacious? I have vague memories from my philosophy studies that
someone looked into it, but vague is an overstatement, so can for the
life of me not remember.
On Sat, 11 May 2024 10:14:56 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 11/05/2024 09:47, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Sat, 11 May 2024 09:00:27 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 10/05/2024 22:24, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Fri, 10 May 2024 17:16:15 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 09/05/2024 23:49, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
Try telling that to climate change [scientists]...
They have evidence. You don’t.
Do they?
Look closer.
Evidence of what, exactly?
Says the one with their eyes closed.
Better that than a closed mind ...
Noticed those insurance premiums against natural disasters going up?
Money talks. What happens to those who don’t listen?
On 12/05/2024 01:16, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
Noticed those insurance premiums against natural disasters going up?Nope.
On Sat, 11 May 2024 11:31:09 +0200, D wrote:
On Fri, 10 May 2024, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Fri, 10 May 2024 17:16:15 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:No they don't. Seriously, they don't.
On 09/05/2024 23:49, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
Try telling that to climate change [scientists]...
They have evidence. You don’t.
Seriously, they do.
Noticed those insurance premiums against natural disasters going up?
Money talks. What happens to those who don’t listen?
On Sun, 12 May 2024 01:53:36 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 12/05/2024 01:16, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
Noticed those insurance premiums against natural disasters going up?Nope.
Don’t follow the news?
<https://www.foxbusiness.com/personal-finance/weather-related-events-raise-homeowners-insurance-rates>
Yes, I deliberately picked one from Fox, so that you couldn’t claim it
was “fake news from liberal media”.
On 12/05/2024 01:16, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Sat, 11 May 2024 10:14:56 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 11/05/2024 09:47, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Sat, 11 May 2024 09:00:27 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 10/05/2024 22:24, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Fri, 10 May 2024 17:16:15 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >>>>>>
On 09/05/2024 23:49, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
Try telling that to climate change [scientists]...
They have evidence. You don’t.
Do they?
Look closer.
Evidence of what, exactly?
Says the one with their eyes closed.
Better that than a closed mind ...
Noticed those insurance premiums against natural disasters going up?
Nope.
Ive noticed the insurance premiums on cars parked near or indeed being electric cars going up though.
Money talks. What happens to those who don’t listen?
They make the money
My oil shares tripled in value when everyone said 'oil is dead'
On 11/05/2024 20:17, D wrote:
Not really.
On Sat, 11 May 2024, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 11/05/2024 10:31, D wrote:
On Fri, 10 May 2024, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Fri, 10 May 2024 17:16:15 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 09/05/2024 23:49, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
Try telling that to climate change [scientists]...
They have evidence. You don’t.
No they don't. Seriously, they don't. I think you are trapped by the
eco-fascist propaganda Lawrence.
And that is the problem. There is a conjecture - one of many possible -
that purports to explain the 'facts'.
But the problem of induction, means that there are an infinite number of >>> conjectures that could explain the data, even if the data was clean,
plentiful and unambiguous, which it isn't.
And the current conjecture fits the data so badly that its excused by the >>> fallacious 'precautionary principle' to justify doing stuff that cannot
work 'in case' they are in fact right.
Another conjecture, that they dont understand how climate works at all,
and something else is in play, is simply disregarded, because it doesn't >>> lead to sales of greenCrap™ and research money for academics.
Turkeys don't vote for Christmas and 'climate scientists' don't vote for >>> 'natural causes'.
Nor do the mass of ArtStudents who have leapt on the media bandwagon or
the companies that sell greenCrap or the politicians trying to make
careers out of it.
Its a trillion dollar boondoggle.
All based on just one conjecture, that has in fact been demonstrated to be >>> false.
A most convenient lie, however.
Wow, way more articulate than I usually see. Do you have a blog or
something where you expand on your brief summary above?
People don't do 'reason' these days. Its all about 'feelings'
And as Roger Scruton remarked, you don't reason people out of positions they weren't reasoned into in the first place.
Anti-Vax, anti-nuclear. God is dead, worship Gaia instead. Man is essentially evil and full of sin and technology is his greatest expression of it.
Also, honest question, why do you think the precautionary principle is
fallacious? I have vague memories from my philosophy studies that someone
looked into it, but vague is an overstatement, so can for the life of me
not remember.
Never get in a car or an aeroplane. You *could* crash.
Never strike out for shore when away from the shore, you *could* tire yourself out and drown.
Never invent fire, you *could* burn your cave down
Never knap flints, you *could* cut yourself.
Never eat cereals - you *could* ruin your teeth.
Always hang on tight to Nurse
For fear of something even worse.
You think that is the correct and appropriate way to behave ?
It is monstrously senseless ArtStudent™ invented Luddite philosophy.
Don't use nuclear power, it *could* go bang.
Instead condemn us all to death anyway from energy poverty, simply because YOU, the ArtStudent™ dont understand and cannot understand the risk, because
your brain only thinks in Boolean concepts = safe/unsafe.
Never /how/ safe.
It is reactionary kneejerk Leftist stupididity dressed up in big words to make it seem intellectually justified
How about Never let a Muslim into your town - they *could* be a terrorist?
Granted, due to incompetent socialist politicians, inflation has
soared ...
Granted, due to incompetent socialist politicians, inflation has soaredYup
so that is probably why you see some increase, except for some random
hot spots.
On Sun, 12 May 2024 01:53:36 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:Fox news? no one believes them EITHER
On 12/05/2024 01:16, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
Noticed those insurance premiums against natural disasters going up?Nope.
Don’t follow the news?
<https://www.foxbusiness.com/personal-finance/weather-related-events-raise-homeowners-insurance-rates>
Yes, I deliberately picked one from Fox, so that you couldn’t claim it
was “fake news from liberal media”.
On Sun, 12 May 2024, The Natural Philosopher wrote:The precautionary principle IS just silliness.
On 11/05/2024 20:17, D wrote:
Not really.
On Sat, 11 May 2024, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 11/05/2024 10:31, D wrote:
On Fri, 10 May 2024, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Fri, 10 May 2024 17:16:15 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >>>>>>
On 09/05/2024 23:49, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
Try telling that to climate change [scientists]...
They have evidence. You don’t.
No they don't. Seriously, they don't. I think you are trapped by
the eco-fascist propaganda Lawrence.
And that is the problem. There is a conjecture - one of many
possible - that purports to explain the 'facts'.
But the problem of induction, means that there are an infinite
number of conjectures that could explain the data, even if the data
was clean, plentiful and unambiguous, which it isn't.
And the current conjecture fits the data so badly that its excused
by the fallacious 'precautionary principle' to justify doing stuff
that cannot work 'in case' they are in fact right.
Another conjecture, that they dont understand how climate works at
all, and something else is in play, is simply disregarded, because
it doesn't lead to sales of greenCrap™ and research money for
academics.
Turkeys don't vote for Christmas and 'climate scientists' don't vote
for 'natural causes'.
Nor do the mass of ArtStudents who have leapt on the media bandwagon
or the companies that sell greenCrap or the politicians trying to
make careers out of it.
Its a trillion dollar boondoggle.
All based on just one conjecture, that has in fact been demonstrated
to be false.
A most convenient lie, however.
Wow, way more articulate than I usually see. Do you have a blog or
something where you expand on your brief summary above?
People don't do 'reason' these days. Its all about 'feelings'
And as Roger Scruton remarked, you don't reason people out of
positions they weren't reasoned into in the first place.
Anti-Vax, anti-nuclear. God is dead, worship Gaia instead. Man is
essentially evil and full of sin and technology is his greatest
expression of it.
The furthest I can go to "meet" an eco-fascist is the eco-optimism of
Björn Lomborg. He argues that we should not do CO2 taxes and enormous political programs. He argues that we should take a fraction of that
money and invest in research to find solution to _clearly defined_ environmental problems and that that will achieve much more than CO2
taxes that are gamed and rigged from the start. I'm sure he and I have
many differences of opinion, but I am always open to investing more into research and technology as long as it isn't "gender-science" which is
what europe seems to be specializing a lot in. ;)
And no eco-fascist has been able to tell me how come the earth did not
self destruct despite havign 10-20x CO2 in the atmossphere, how come we
had 3 km of ice in northern europe and how come the Thames froze over
etc. _without CO2_.
I think it is pretty obvious there are bigger effects causing climate changes, such as _the sun_, instead of a tiny fraction of a fraction of
CO2 in the atmosphere.
Also, honest question, why do you think the precautionary principle
is fallacious? I have vague memories from my philosophy studies that
someone looked into it, but vague is an overstatement, so can for the
life of me not remember.
Never get in a car or an aeroplane. You *could* crash.
Never strike out for shore when away from the shore, you *could* tire
yourself out and drown.
Never invent fire, you *could* burn your cave down
Never knap flints, you *could* cut yourself.
Never eat cereals - you *could* ruin your teeth.
Always hang on tight to Nurse
For fear of something even worse.
You think that is the correct and appropriate way to behave ?
It is monstrously senseless ArtStudent™ invented Luddite philosophy.
Don't use nuclear power, it *could* go bang.
Instead condemn us all to death anyway from energy poverty, simply
because YOU, the ArtStudent™ dont understand and cannot understand the
risk, because your brain only thinks in Boolean concepts = safe/unsafe.
Never /how/ safe.
It is reactionary kneejerk Leftist stupididity dressed up in big
words to make it seem intellectually justified
How about Never let a Muslim into your town - they *could* be a
terrorist?
Oh, but that is not the precautionary principle, that's just silliness.
So you are saying that in serious discussions, your examples above are
used, not as jokes, but as serious arguments?
I'm very happy I've left the arena of democratic debates and discussions behind in middle age. ;) I have no patience for people who seriously
think the way you illustrate above.
On Sun, 12 May 2024, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 12/05/2024 01:16, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Sat, 11 May 2024 10:14:56 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 11/05/2024 09:47, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Sat, 11 May 2024 09:00:27 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 10/05/2024 22:24, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Fri, 10 May 2024 17:16:15 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >>>>>>>
On 09/05/2024 23:49, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
Try telling that to climate change [scientists]...
They have evidence. You don’t.
Do they?
Look closer.
Evidence of what, exactly?
Says the one with their eyes closed.
Better that than a closed mind ...
Noticed those insurance premiums against natural disasters going up?
Nope.
Ive noticed the insurance premiums on cars parked near or indeed being
electric cars going up though.
Money talks. What happens to those who don’t listen?
They make the money
My oil shares tripled in value when everyone said 'oil is dead'
How long have you been invested? My oil shares have only doubled in
value! =( On the other hand, the dividend has reachest a sweet 4%-5% per
year I think, so that is certainly a nice little extra into the account.
Also, do you have any other eco-contrarian investments I should look into?Well Rolls Rocce fell though the floor in COVID as no one was flying,m
On 12/05/2024 11:36, D wrote:
Granted, due to incompetent socialist politicians, inflation has soared so >> that is probably why you see some increase, except for some random hotYup
spots.
EVs have driven car insuance up
On Sun, 12 May 2024 12:36:52 +0200, D wrote:
Granted, due to incompetent socialist politicians, inflation has
soared ...
“Socialist politicians” ... really? In Texas?
<https://www.foxbusiness.com/personal-finance/weather-related-events-raise-homeowners-insurance-rates>
On 12/05/2024 11:44, D wrote:
Oddly I inherited those from my mothers estate years ago
On Sun, 12 May 2024, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 12/05/2024 01:16, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Sat, 11 May 2024 10:14:56 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 11/05/2024 09:47, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Sat, 11 May 2024 09:00:27 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >>>>>>
On 10/05/2024 22:24, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Fri, 10 May 2024 17:16:15 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >>>>>>>>
On 09/05/2024 23:49, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
Try telling that to climate change [scientists]...
They have evidence. You don’t.
Do they?
Look closer.
Evidence of what, exactly?
Says the one with their eyes closed.
Better that than a closed mind ...
Noticed those insurance premiums against natural disasters going up?
Nope.
Ive noticed the insurance premiums on cars parked near or indeed being
electric cars going up though.
Money talks. What happens to those who don’t listen?
They make the money
My oil shares tripled in value when everyone said 'oil is dead'
How long have you been invested? My oil shares have only doubled in value! >> =( On the other hand, the dividend has reachest a sweet 4%-5% per year I
think, so that is certainly a nice little extra into the account.
Also, do you have any other eco-contrarian investments I should look into?Well Rolls Rocce fell though the floor in COVID as no one was flying,m but now they are and so are the shares. They are also trying to get a small nuclear reactor design approved.
Fox news? no one believes them EITHER
Could it be that part of the increase is compensating for years when
rates increased with less than the inflation?
On Sun, 12 May 2024, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Sun, 12 May 2024 12:36:52 +0200, D wrote:Sorry forgot that Biden was from Texas! Thank you for reminding me! =)
Granted, due to incompetent socialist politicians, inflation has
soared ...
“Socialist politicians” ... really? In Texas?
<https://www.foxbusiness.com/personal-finance/weather-related-events- raise-homeowners-insurance-rates>
On Sun, 12 May 2024 19:21:33 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Fox news? no one believes them EITHER
Your ex-Dictator Trump used to be quite fond of them. Are they PNG now?
On Sun, 12 May 2024 12:51:38 +0200, D wrote:
Could it be that part of the increase is compensating for years when
rates increased with less than the inflation?
Why do you think Texas is particularly hard hit?
On Sun, 12 May 2024 19:21:33 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Fox news? no one believes them EITHER
Your ex-Dictator Trump used to be quite fond of them. Are they PNG now?
On Sun, 12 May 2024, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Well Rolls Rocce fell though the floor in COVID as no one was flying,m
but now they are and so are the shares. They are also trying to get a
small nuclear reactor design approved.
Will look into it. Generally, nuclear would seem like the logical
choice, but there's still a lot of opposition to it from the deep state,
so it could take decades before an investment blossoms.
I did look at a swedish nuclear power services company, but they were
already fairly highly valuated, due to the EU acknowledgeing nuclear as
green energy I suspect.
On Sun, 12 May 2024, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Sun, 12 May 2024 19:21:33 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Fox news? no one believes them EITHER
Your ex-Dictator Trump used to be quite fond of them. Are they PNG now?
Are you mad? Trump is not a dictator. If this is your mental model of
the world, I doubt we'll have many meaningful discussions, since we
would not be able to agree on a common ground to establish any truth
values of your claims.
On Sun, 12 May 2024, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Sun, 12 May 2024 12:51:38 +0200, D wrote:You tell me.
Could it be that part of the increase is compensating for years when
rates increased with less than the inflation?
Why do you think Texas is particularly hard hit?
On Sun, 12 May 2024, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
Why do you think Texas has been particularly hard hit?You tell me.
On 5/9/24 12:20, candycanearter07 wrote:
Wouldn't it still try to call itself?
Not if you take care to make sure it doesn't happen.
The wrapper script sets it's own PATH to directories that don't include sym-links to itself.
Really fascinating solution otherwise, though.
Link - Sudify
- https://dotfiles.tnetconsulting.net/tools/sudify/sudify.html
I might implement that myself.
It's an interesting exercise.
I find sudify to be extremely helpful and means that I can do the things
that need other user privileges EXTREMELY transparently while in the
shell as my user.
On 12/05/2024 20:42, D wrote:
On Sun, 12 May 2024, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
I invested in nuclear around 2006 when it was clear that there was no other alternative to it, and lost a little.Well Rolls Rocce fell though the floor in COVID as no one was flying,m but >>> now they are and so are the shares. They are also trying to get a small
nuclear reactor design approved.
Will look into it. Generally, nuclear would seem like the logical choice,
but there's still a lot of opposition to it from the deep state, so it
could take decades before an investment blossoms.
It takes around 15-25 years for the 'exhausting every other alternative' bit to happen.
I think we have another 5 years of renewable crap to live through before someone like Bill Gates builds a small reactor and suddenly they are 'what everybody uses'
You don't have to be concerned about climate change to realise we are running out of *cheap* fossil fuel, at least in Europe, and the drive to renewables plus bigging up climate change as a *moral* issue reflects a typical ArtStudent™ response to that.
I did look at a swedish nuclear power services company, but they were
already fairly highly valuated, due to the EU acknowledgeing nuclear as
green energy I suspect.
I shied away from ARM years ago when someone pointed out that their valuation required 'every household to own half a dozen microcontrollers'.
What with smart phones TVS and cars, today they do...
My strategy is simple. Put a few in my portfolio, and if they start to climb, buy more. |If they don't, sell them.
On Mon, 13 May 2024 11:43:31 +0200, D wrote:
Are you mad?
No, I live in a democracy. Where every vote counts equally, the voter has
a realistic choice of more than two parties to vote for, and those running for election are not the ones running the election.
You know, “rule of law”, “checks and balances”, all that applies.
On Mon, 13 May 2024 11:42:39 +0200, D wrote:
On Sun, 12 May 2024, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Sun, 12 May 2024 12:51:38 +0200, D wrote:You tell me.
Could it be that part of the increase is compensating for years when
rates increased with less than the inflation?
Why do you think Texas is particularly hard hit?
Gives the lie to that business about “socialist politicians”, doesn’t it?
On Mon, 13 May 2024, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Mon, 13 May 2024 11:43:31 +0200, D wrote:Doesn't follow from what you said and doesn't answer the question.
Are you mad?
No, I live in a democracy. Where every vote counts equally, the voter
has a realistic choice of more than two parties to vote for, and those
running for election are not the ones running the election.
You know, “rule of law”, “checks and balances”, all that applies.
On Tue, 14 May 2024, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Mon, 13 May 2024 11:43:49 +0200, D wrote:No.
On Sun, 12 May 2024, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
Why do you think Texas has been particularly hard hit?You tell me.
Gives the lie to that business about “socialist politicians”, doesn’t >> it?
On Tue, 14 May 2024 21:21:55 +0200, D wrote:
On Mon, 13 May 2024, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Mon, 13 May 2024 11:43:31 +0200, D wrote:Doesn't follow from what you said and doesn't answer the question.
Are you mad?
No, I live in a democracy. Where every vote counts equally, the voter
has a realistic choice of more than two parties to vote for, and those
running for election are not the ones running the election.
You know, “rule of law”, “checks and balances”, all that applies. >>>
It means we can tell when one of your politicians is trying to subvert the norms of a democracy, because we can recognize attempts at antidemocratic actions when we see them. “The price of liberty is eternal vigilance”, and
all that.
On Fri, 17 May 2024, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Tue, 14 May 2024 21:22:41 +0200, D wrote:Depends.
On Tue, 14 May 2024, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Mon, 13 May 2024 11:43:49 +0200, D wrote:No.
On Sun, 12 May 2024, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
Why do you think Texas has been particularly hard hit?You tell me.
Gives the lie to that business about “socialist politicians”, doesn’t
it?
You’re not saying Governor Abbott is a “socialist”, are you?
Houston got hit again quite badly in the last day or so.
On Mon, 13 May 2024, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Mon, 13 May 2024 11:42:39 +0200, D wrote:Of course not.
On Sun, 12 May 2024, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Sun, 12 May 2024 12:51:38 +0200, D wrote:You tell me.
Could it be that part of the increase is compensating for years when >>>>> rates increased with less than the inflation?
Why do you think Texas is particularly hard hit?
Gives the lie to that business about “socialist politicians”, doesn’t >> it?
Texas, Arkansas, Oklahoma all badly hit by weather events today. People killed. Seems you picked the wrong time to go spouting nonsense about “socialist politicians”, didn’t you?
On 27/05/2024 09:16, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
Texas, Arkansas, Oklahoma all badly hit by weather events today. People
killed. Seems you picked the wrong time to go spouting nonsense about
“socialist politicians”, didn’t you?
What have bad weather events got to do with politics?
On 2024-05-27 17:13, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 27/05/2024 09:16, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
Texas, Arkansas, Oklahoma all badly hit by weather events today. People
killed. Seems you picked the wrong time to go spouting nonsense about
“socialist politicians”, didn’t you?
What have bad weather events got to do with politics?
It is not bad weather, it is man made climate change.
Now, stop talking politics in a Linux group and move elsewhere.
On 28/05/2024 12:11, Carlos E.R. wrote:
It is not bad weather, it is man made climate change.Ah. So it IS politics.
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 28/05/2024 12:11, Carlos E.R. wrote:
It is not bad weather, it is man made climate change.
Ah. So it IS politics.
No, it's called science.
Science is what is still valid even if you don't believe in it.
On 2024-05-28, Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> wrote:
Science is what is still valid even if you don't believe in it.
Yup. Good one. Or, as Philip K. Dick put it:
Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it,
doesn't go away.
On Wed, 8 May 2024 11:53:57 +0200, D wrote:
A more senior consultant at that time, told me he always installed some
private guys gnu utils on every AIX machine he administered.
Every seasoned Unix sysadmin had the tradition of doing that.
I remember thinking that it did feel a bit insecure ...
Why? Unix folks preferred the GNU tools because they tended to be of
higher quality than the vendor-proprietary stuff.
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On Mon, 6 May 2024 11:41:38 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
For specific tasks by users on a multiuser machine sudo is well
controlled For doing engine out maintenance by skilled personnel, its a
sodding encumbrance.
Pro tip: one of the commands you can feed to sudo is “/bin/bash”.
I am wondering why people are so darn creative to work around a simple
sudo -i.
I find FreeBSD to be a very nice environment to work in, and you can do
that without installing everything GNU. :-)
On Sat, 06 Jul 2024 18:25:26 -0400, Bud Frede wrote:
I find FreeBSD to be a very nice environment to work in, and you can do
that without installing everything GNU. :-)
My one recent exposure to FreeBSD was a pfSense box. Took me a while to figure out that, while the “route” command let you maintain the routing table, it didn’t actually have any option to *display* the routing table: to get that, you did “netstat -r”.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 497 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 14:51:37 |
| Calls: | 9,784 |
| Calls today: | 3 |
| Files: | 13,748 |
| Messages: | 6,187,485 |
