pecg

If the password used for the user, in the remote machine, is different from that of the machine he/she is connecting from, the attacker will not be able to gain root access, even if the account has permission to escalate priviledges.

Disable root authentication over ssh should be the default too. This is literally ssh 101.

Simple and straightforward article that exposes one of many usual misbehaviors of so called sysadmins these days: they think they know their tools, but haven't even completely read the manual for the programs they rely on production environments. Systems administration is something to be taken seriously; recently a friend of mine, that knows nothing about network perimeter security and didn't enforced adequate credentials on production environments, got a RANSOMWARE on a machine with a critical for business instance of a CRM database, chiefs on the organization refused to pay for the bitcoins asked, and probably my friend will be fired for incompetence; the infrastructure department personnel doesn't even have backups of such server, it's clear the information is lost forever.

Long time voidlinux user here on a laptop, and have also used extensibly: archlinux, gentoo, openbsd (it hosts and smtp, and web server public on the internet), freebsd, alpine and slackware-current. From void you should expect many things to be different:

* No launchd or systemd mess. Runit takes care of the init process.

* xbps: a fast and simple package management software, that also resolves dependencies.

* Clean but scarse documentation, if you have used other distributions you should be fine.

* No automatic configuration of programs, you have to explicitly define what you want for sshd, nginx, etc.

I started GNU/Linux distribution hopping after archlinux's maintainers decided to migrate to systemd, back then I had been using it without problems and for experimentation purposes followed the migration; after a couple of updates I had an unbootable system were systemd wasn't able to run logind, diagnosis showed all files where in place, but run out of time and didn't want to discover what was wrong with it.

I use voidlinux on a T410s mainly for developing, learning programming languages and experiment from time to time with KVM and libvirt (which is another mess), hope to change completely to openbsd in a couple of months.

Except that emacs is less bloated and doesn't crash as often, and not being and important program for the system, one can easily replace it with more simple software.

Couldn't agree more with you. Simplicity is the key to a sane world. I haven't had any problems with colors or fonts with st since I dropped urxvt in favor of the former. It is also harmful to assume that bash is always present, or worst, that it is the default shell; I've spent a reasonable amount of time learning how to effectively write portable shell scripts that can run in any Unix-like system, because portability is important. Bash is huge, and that makes it more prone to error and bugs, not to mention slower, the perfect balance I've found between speed and interactivity is mksh, I know dash can be faster, but it only works for scripting, as an interactive shell it sucks, and that's ok.

I think this fact demonstrates why EME was implemented in the first place. One could argue that Mozilla is there to fight against DRM in the web, but fighting against three powerful organizations is not something to be desired.

You are correct. The idea of dinosaurs with feathers is older than the 90s, even Dr. Alan Grant suggests this when speaking about raptors, on the other hand evidence appeared until mid 90s.

You are correct in every aspect. Non-color treatement is something I definitely miss from movies of the 90s. Digital processing technologies have made it easier for people working on cinema to color-treat the movie as product. Even directors not involved with digital filming, fall on this: Christopher Nolan and Quentin Tarantino, all fail to deliver a natural and coherent visual representation of color.

EDIT: Her was a beautiful experience in itself.

When JP was filmed, the discovery of dinosaurs having feathers hadn't happened yet, and big efforts were made on providing accurate representations of what was known about the creatures. Back then scientists still thought dinosaurs were reptiles' ancestors, so the skin had to look reptile-like; personally, I think they succeeded, and a bigger success was shown in The Lost World, years after.

Justice League is in Star Wars: The Attack of the Clones' level of horrendous abuse of CGI.

Personally, I think one of the main problems with current use of CGI (specifically in non-animated movies) is color treatment. Comparisons between the original non-altered version of Jurassic Park (JP) against Jurassic World (JW) shows my point. There is an increased tendency to change hue and saturation of color in post-production, in order to transmit ideas or set moods on the film itself, but this makes CGI look faker than what it is and the brain is able to identify it.

EDIT: I prefer the look of JP over JW, not because I think it has better CGI, but because colors look more closer to reality.

> WWW solved an entirely different problem, namely distribution and communication.

> JS et. al. solved the problem of responsiveness and interaction ie. latency.

I don't think either of these statements is correct. There wasn't a problem of 'responsiveness' and 'interaction' on http to begin with, in fact what Sun and Netscape did with javascript was to overengineer the web because they saw it as a business opportunity to add client-side code. http was designed (badly) to exchange hypertext documents, not to perform transactions over the server, or render video-games, or play music and videos, and certainly not to transfer files, for the latter ftp was desgined (also badly).

You forgot about the lack of standarization in the pseudo-VM, each javascript engine supports a specific set of ECMAScript.

Node.js uses javascript as its default language interface, and considering it is software intended for server-side, with a userbase ranging from Microsoft, IBM, Netflix, Yahoo and Paypal (to name a few) in production environments, I would assert without doubt that it is in fact critical.

Also, with the ever increasing level of software complexity many websites rely on, reading such text isn't as simple as it may seem, to give clear example, Google's default page in only one reference javascript file from apis.google.com has ~8000 lines of code, which is deliberately difficult to understand by itself: variables have weird names, lots of anonymous functions, and so on.

And this is exactly what I'm going to do, switch to a simple browser, in my personal computers. If they programmed firefox to be capable of doing thinks like this, then definitely I cannot trust them anymore.

I find interesting to observe how Microsoft position has changed over the years. They tend to focus now on command line users, and provide tools with open source licenses, it seems they are trying to be more 'Unix-like' these days; still, I don't think they offer any substantial value over mature, powerful and integrated tools, and personally I don't feel attracted to the idea of supporting a company that practices EEE and uses monopoly strategies to retain market share.

This is the same article of: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15852007

Well, the article's author assumes every GNU/Linux sysadmin is running bash as the default interactive shell for root, and systemd as the init/login/logger/network/<and satan knows what else> daemon, which is not true. Many distributions using the linux kernel avoid systemd and bash as part of the defaults, for lots of different reasons, so from a technical point of view I think the article is useless.

> But calling it Android Go Edition, may sound cool as a marketing buzz, but utterly distracts from what it is as well as confusing given GoLang

This is exactly what I thought. I was expecting to read something about how they rewrote the apps with Go, and how they improved compilation times or any other thing.

I think it is important for us to think more on the resources, for programs we write consume, when: they are compiling, they are executing and when they are just "dormant" on persistent memory. Experience and history shows that the bigger the program is, the more resources it needs to function, the more bugs it has, which consequently makes it more difficult to debug and prone to failure.

My bad, I missed that comment, was even reading the source code trying to find something about it. Thank you.

I agree. If a company prevents users from having control over their hardware, then it can be trivial for such company to control whatever software the user chooses to install on the computer.

And this is one of the things that worries me the most. The careless people that embrace confidently their lack of privacy, such group can quickly become the majority of a given population and follow a trend that can lead to social disaster in an Orwellian-Huxleyian way, without appearing as such in the surface.

This is a definitely an interesting approach. What is the web engine behind it? I thought about the idea on building a simplified interface for blink and V8, but they are extremely and differently glued to other pieces of software in each Chromium release, that it is indeed hard to keep track on them.