Discuss

discuss@lists.centos.org

2 participants
34758 discussions

Re: [CentOS] Fedora change that will probably affect RHEL
by James B. Byrne 02 Aug '15

02 Aug '15

On Thu, July 30, 2015 14:20, Warren Young wrote: > > Did you see my exchange with James Byrne? His bogus counter to my > claim that iPads canât be turned into botnet conscripts was to point > (very indirectly) to a paper where some researchers found a way to > jump through a whole bunch of hoops to bypass all the security Apple > had placed in the path of app sideloading. > http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/06/17/apple_hosed_boffins_drop_0day_mac_i… http://www.lifehacker.co.uk/2015/06/17/the-deadly-0-day-flaws-in-ios-and-os… https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/3a68wt/passwordkiller_0days_f… http://www.applenewscenter.com/2015/06/17/apple-cored-boffins-reveal-passwo… Evidently not quite so bogus. -- *** e-Mail is NOT a SECURE channel *** Do NOT transmit sensitive data via e-Mail James B. Byrne mailto:ByrneJB@Harte-Lyne.ca Harte & Lyne Limited http://www.harte-lyne.ca 9 Brockley Drive vox: +1 905 561 1241 Hamilton, Ontario fax: +1 905 561 0757 Canada L8E 3C3

1 0

CentOS 7
by Eddie G. O'Connor Jr. 02 Aug '15

02 Aug '15

Greetings all, just wondering if anyone knows if / when there will be training materials for RHEL 7 (CEntOS7) available? The last book I was able to purchase was the study guide for the RHSCA / RHCE exam, (by Michal Jang!) Does anyone know if / when the next versions will be out? I'd like to go through it all with the latest and not "last years model" under my belt! Thanks! EGO II

2 2

CentOS Continuous Release Repository updated with CentOS-6.7 RPMs
by Johnny Hughes 02 Aug '15

02 Aug '15

The packages that will become CentOS-6.7, as well as updates completed for CentOS-6.7 to date are now released into the CentOS-6.6 Continuous Release (CR) repository. All packages except for the centos-release RPM are included. The purpose of the CR repository is to make the built packages optionally available to users who opt in while we work on the CentOS-6.7 install tree and all the CentOS-6.7 install media and images. Normally the full release follows the CR release in 7-14 days if you do not use the CR process. For more info on the CR repository, see this link: http://wiki.centos.org/AdditionalResources/Repositories/CR If you want to enable CR on CentOS-6.6, use the command: yum install centos-release-cr You would then get the updates with the command: yum upgrade Known issues: 1. sssd-common is no longer multilib in CentOS 6.7. If you have the 32bit sssd-common installed on your x86_64 system, you will need to remove it with yum remove sssd-common.i686 prior to updating. 2. The boost RPMs are built with cmake-2.8 and the configuration files produced cause issues building some source code. There are an upstream bugs here (which is likely NOT being fixed): https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=849791 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1245805 and there are related CentOS issues found previously: http://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=8117 If you are using boost to create packages, you can use the switch: "-DBoost_NO_BOOST_CMAKE=ON" To build sources that exhibit this issue. 3. The satyr package from EPEL is newer than the version included in CentOS-6.7. The package from EPEL seems to work OK as well, but they are likely to remove it as it also conflicts with RHEL-6.7. We have not observed any negative impacts from this issue. 4. yum-plugin-downloadonly has been obsoleted by yum and that functionality is now built into the default yum package. More information: 1. These CentOS packages are built from the RHEL-6.7 source code released by Red Hat on July 22, 2015. Please review the release and technical notes for that release here: http://red.ht/1JnEsVQ http://red.ht/1gdBkRu 2. The CentOS release notes for CentOS-6.7, currently a work in progress and not really complete until the final 6.7 release, are available here: http://wiki.centos.org/Manuals/ReleaseNotes/CentOS6.7 3. The package set includes 243 Source RPMs updated and are broken down as: 21 Security Updates: 0 Critical Security 1 Important Security 16 Moderate Security 4 Low Security 25 Enhancement Updates 197 Bugfix Updates Individual per-package release announcements are available here: http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-cr-announce/2015-July/thread.html -- Johnny Hughes CentOS Project { http://www.centos.org/ } irc: hughesjr, #centos(a)irc.freenode.net

4 3

centos 6 and mailman and dmarc
by John R Pierce 01 Aug '15

01 Aug '15

so... I've got some mailman lists running on centos 6. apparently c6 has mailman 2.1.12, which is far too old to have the dmarc patches (introduced in 2.1.16 and updated in 2.1.??, so of course, I'm having ongoing issues with yahoo/sbc/att/aol/etc subscribers and bouncing messages ending up causing 30%+ of my subscribers not to be able to get mail. These are mostly non-technical people (main list here is a music festival thing), so I can't just tell them to get a different mail provider. RHEL has apparently addressed this DMARC problem with https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2015-1417.html and mailman-2.1.12-25.el6.x86_64 but all I see in the C6 repo is mailman-2.1.12-18.el6.x86_64 What do y'all do? build your own mailman infrastructure from source? is there a 3rd party repo build of mailman 2.1.16+ ? -- john r pierce, recycling bits in santa cruz

3 3

livecd vs nfsroot vs what?
by Nux! 01 Aug '15

01 Aug '15

Hi, I'm trying to deploy some non-linux OS via pxe and I was thinking to just launch CentOS in RAM and then run dd or qemu-img or something like this in order to complete the other OS install via template imaging. My first idea was to build a custom CentOS livecd and use that in combination with pxe kernel parameters, but perhaps there's a better way to do this. Ideas? Thanks, Lucian -- Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology! Nux! www.nux.ro

2 2

Re: [CentOS] Fedora change that will probably affect RHEL
by Scott Robbins 31 Jul '15

31 Jul '15

This might show up twice, I think I sent it from a bad address previously. If so, please accept my apologies. In Fedora 22, one developer (and only one) decided that if the password chosen during installation wasn't of sufficient strength, the install wouldn't continue. A bug was filed, and there was also a great deal of aggravation about it on the Fedora testing list. So, it was dropped. However, like a US (and probably other countries) politician who has one bad law suddenly exposed, it seems they are doing it for F23, judging from a test installation. I've filed a bug if anyone wants to chime in and ask them not to do it. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1246771 -- Scott Robbins PGP keyID EB3467D6 ( 1B48 077D 66F6 9DB0 FDC2 A409 FA54 EB34 67D6 ) gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys EB3467D6

18 77

Re: [CentOS] Fedora change that will probably affect RHEL
by James B. Byrne 31 Jul '15

31 Jul '15

On Thu, July 30, 2015 12:54, Chris Murphy wrote: > On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 9:54 AM, Valeri Galtsev > <galtsev(a)kicp.uchicago.edu> wrote: > >>> Now I use Google. They offer MFA opt in. And now I'm more secure >>> than I was with the myopic ISP. >> >> "More secure" only to the level one can trust google ;-) > > Yes I know, but I put them in approximately the same ballpark as > having to trust my proprietary CPU, and proprietary logic board's > proprietary firmware. So your motherboards and nics can 'call-home' on a regular basis and you would not mind if they did? There is, in my opinion, a fundamental difference between accepting the possibility of vendor installed trojans on hosts that may never be connected to an external network and adopting an infrastructure that depends upon such behaviour. Ones risk tolerance varies according to the perceived value of the asset to be protected. The problem that Google, Amazon, NSA, FSB, GCHQ, CCSE and the rest pose to the average person is that the average person has no idea of how to value pervasive recording of their private activities. Thus there is no basis upon which they may form a reasonable risk assessment. Therefore no reasonable estimation of the acceptable cost for prevention can be made. Consequently this promotes the prevalence of what amounts to folk-remedy security measures; virus scanners (most of dubious or no worth) mainly; master password protection schemes (that in many cases require you to reveal all of your passwords to third-parties); and of course consumer grade two-factor authentication schemes that just happen to require revelation of your private cell phone number to commercial enterprises. The common elements to all these are: low cost, dubious efficacy, hidden defects, and consumer ignorance. I have a router at home that 'talks' to both my ISP and its manufacturer on a regular basis, regardless of whether or not there is active traffic on the exceptional circuit. Which behaviour is why all of my home traffic, internal and external, goes via an ssh pipe established through a system placed in front of the router. But how many consumers, and keep in mind that my ISP is one of the largest telecoms in the world, would even dream that such things happen? Much less take steps to thwart that surveillance? Or even know what steps are possible? This sort of stuff should be out and out illegal. But, as the router is the 'property' of the telecom it is up to them what they wish to have it do and the consumer's choice it put up with that or do without. We are living in the golden age of snake-oil technology. Which, as the governments of the world have become addicted to surveillance of their subjects, -- one cannot really call citizens those so treated by their rulers -- is unlikely to change for a generation or more. It took more than 100 years of consumer activism to change advertising and product safety laws and these are yet far from perfect. I am not convinced that effective data security laws will prove any easier to establish. Or be accomplished any sooner. Which is why I consider discussion of password strength nothing more than a pointless diversion of attention from the real issues of data security and network integrity. A discussion that is truly representative of our 'security theatre' industry; being both expensive and irrelevant. In system design we call this stuff 'bike-shedding'. -- *** e-Mail is NOT a SECURE channel *** Do NOT transmit sensitive data via e-Mail James B. Byrne mailto:ByrneJB@Harte-Lyne.ca Harte & Lyne Limited http://www.harte-lyne.ca 9 Brockley Drive vox: +1 905 561 1241 Hamilton, Ontario fax: +1 905 561 0757 Canada L8E 3C3

2 1

CentOS-announce Digest, Vol 125, Issue 13
by centos-announce-request＠centos.org 31 Jul '15

31 Jul '15

Send CentOS-announce mailing list submissions to centos-announce(a)centos.org To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-announce or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to centos-announce-request(a)centos.org You can reach the person managing the list at centos-announce-owner(a)centos.org When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of CentOS-announce digest..." Today's Topics: 1. CESA-2015:1526 Important CentOS 7 java-1.6.0-openjdk Security Update (Johnny Hughes) 2. CESA-2015:1526 Important CentOS 5 java-1.6.0-openjdk Security Update (Johnny Hughes) 3. CEBA-2015:1521 CentOS 7 less FASTTRACK BugFix Update (Johnny Hughes) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2015 23:38:45 +0000 From: Johnny Hughes <johnny(a)centos.org> To: centos-announce(a)centos.org Subject: [CentOS-announce] CESA-2015:1526 Important CentOS 7 java-1.6.0-openjdk Security Update Message-ID: <20150730233845.GA7361(a)n04.lon1.karan.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii CentOS Errata and Security Advisory 2015:1526 Important Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2015-1526.html The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently syncing to the mirrors: ( sha256sum Filename ) x86_64: 5e91f94700cc94a8422277dcca5146e2f54a33547397d0b467e52e916ded811a java-1.6.0-openjdk-1.6.0.36-1.13.8.1.el7_1.x86_64.rpm 3e22027833fc703705aa7bbc9cb395733f2098320dc6538cd59bba7015d94745 java-1.6.0-openjdk-demo-1.6.0.36-1.13.8.1.el7_1.x86_64.rpm 7a3a1b5b8bcaf615fa3797b9c76660a11e6ecd8b43670a4da00d610fe7c32b1d java-1.6.0-openjdk-devel-1.6.0.36-1.13.8.1.el7_1.x86_64.rpm a2753379c1c1e628a155cd2af93a1c44ef7a44d164ce39fdddef0c51dbb53ad6 java-1.6.0-openjdk-javadoc-1.6.0.36-1.13.8.1.el7_1.x86_64.rpm a263d9da3f58f534699e226540180c7874fa38e7a60782a161902c1091e41eb8 java-1.6.0-openjdk-src-1.6.0.36-1.13.8.1.el7_1.x86_64.rpm Source: 41b960e8e0cd7a4acd59a1750fcd2129c95a69a68e92d898ee613e1ae000fef8 java-1.6.0-openjdk-1.6.0.36-1.13.8.1.el7_1.src.rpm -- Johnny Hughes CentOS Project { http://www.centos.org/ } irc: hughesjr, #centos(a)irc.freenode.net ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2015 23:45:17 +0000 From: Johnny Hughes <johnny(a)centos.org> To: centos-announce(a)centos.org Subject: [CentOS-announce] CESA-2015:1526 Important CentOS 5 java-1.6.0-openjdk Security Update Message-ID: <20150730234517.GA7887(a)chakra.karan.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii CentOS Errata and Security Advisory 2015:1526 Important Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2015-1526.html The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently syncing to the mirrors: ( sha256sum Filename ) i386: 11a2635ffab652c45c63ac6aa128866507d5aa53d04ad7030b839f31c6a5f4df java-1.6.0-openjdk-1.6.0.36-1.13.8.1.el5_11.i386.rpm 7597882cfdaf40f21aca2a6af73aedd1ac1bce73e18a316d6db23d56a40f44c6 java-1.6.0-openjdk-demo-1.6.0.36-1.13.8.1.el5_11.i386.rpm a6ceae2f7957675fb06d209fe703019069257c1c31a48a7abf09b8933858077a java-1.6.0-openjdk-devel-1.6.0.36-1.13.8.1.el5_11.i386.rpm 94ec650562cec44847914ce52fb88a83937a8646ac58093aacbb89cc44200580 java-1.6.0-openjdk-javadoc-1.6.0.36-1.13.8.1.el5_11.i386.rpm b44c48cbff3a0eb0fc713ff4bd5624cce7aa5abafa54bdd2994026f57c3542d4 java-1.6.0-openjdk-src-1.6.0.36-1.13.8.1.el5_11.i386.rpm x86_64: 9d896fe3912a3feef0f0806d8ba0231beec02ecaaff0dd3062228c694a94acab java-1.6.0-openjdk-1.6.0.36-1.13.8.1.el5_11.x86_64.rpm e5e5f98447cde6cf42dec41b2012ce03a2c4da60d149b2172f7bc594d3aeeb28 java-1.6.0-openjdk-demo-1.6.0.36-1.13.8.1.el5_11.x86_64.rpm 91996692b0932c47d3d3f37707bfd3d5e119d9bf091940d810b650cbb0984ce3 java-1.6.0-openjdk-devel-1.6.0.36-1.13.8.1.el5_11.x86_64.rpm 1f4028f6cf0ea019a8d032e1860060e71939facfce1497574b2b4420829377ee java-1.6.0-openjdk-javadoc-1.6.0.36-1.13.8.1.el5_11.x86_64.rpm 105b064767a936c604222364891240945104958b0af6fdc013dbc474aa489b66 java-1.6.0-openjdk-src-1.6.0.36-1.13.8.1.el5_11.x86_64.rpm Source: a1823e46d30a1db8e7631e2a912f863f3bad7442db82f9d323dca26dc7cfa9d0 java-1.6.0-openjdk-1.6.0.36-1.13.8.1.el5_11.src.rpm -- Johnny Hughes CentOS Project { http://www.centos.org/ } irc: hughesjr, #centos(a)irc.freenode.net ------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2015 23:57:13 +0000 From: Johnny Hughes <johnny(a)centos.org> To: centos-announce(a)centos.org Subject: [CentOS-announce] CEBA-2015:1521 CentOS 7 less FASTTRACK BugFix Update Message-ID: <20150730235713.GA7907(a)n04.lon1.karan.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii CentOS Errata and Bugfix Advisory 2015:1521 Upstream details at : https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2015-1521.html The following updated files have been uploaded and are currently syncing to the mirrors: ( sha256sum Filename ) x86_64: 94999b90a6ce0c291b86d07ffbd4400409c783b846b65d5c874667dc8938c492 less-458-9.el7.x86_64.rpm Source: cedc1c32bdf9f66401ceba704a168d2bdeae6d6671b1627bd51e1e1696a1c949 less-458-9.el7.src.rpm -- Johnny Hughes CentOS Project { http://www.centos.org/ } irc: hughesjr, #centos(a)irc.freenode.net ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ CentOS-announce mailing list CentOS-announce(a)centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-announce End of CentOS-announce Digest, Vol 125, Issue 13 ************************************************

1 0

centos6 and virtualbox audio problem
by FHDATA 31 Jul '15

31 Jul '15

hello, host: centos6 64bit (dell desktop) guest: windows 7 64bit virtualbox: 4.3.30 problem: host has audio but guest does not. i.e. when virtualbox comes up, it says: No audio devices could be opened. ErrorID: HostAudioNotResponding #lspci -nn | grep -i audio 00:1b.0 Audio device [0403]: Intel Corporation 6 Series/C200 Series Chipset Family High Definition Audio Controller [8 086:1c20] (rev 04) 01:00.1 Audio device [0403]: NVIDIA Corporation GF119 HDMI Audio Controller [10de:0e08] (rev a1) Pulse audio and Alsa installed on the host. trying these settings have not worked so far letting me have audio on the guest: Host Audio Driver: OSS,PULSE,ALSA Audio Controller: Intel HD I am not seeing any audio-related errors in virtualbox log. lot of time spent on this so far; any idea as what to do next will be greatly appreciated. thank you, F-

1 0

rsyslog.conf
by m.roth＠5-cent.us 30 Jul '15

30 Jul '15

I was looking at the manpage for rsyslog.conf, primarily because I need to filter my manager's new fedora 22 logs coming to our loghost, because of the bug that I forwarded (if it gets through). At any rate, I am surprised: under selectors, I see that " The keywords error, warn and panic are deprecated and should not be used anymore." Huh? If I only want warn or more severe, how am I supposed to filter - write a much more elaborate RE? mark

12 23

Jump to page:

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

Discuss