vbezhenar

It is absolutely possible to have very minimal kernel with drivers and many other subsystems running with lowered privileges.

That would greatly reduce privilege escalation possibilities. Right now single vulnerability in any kernel subsystem gives you highest access to the system.

Imagine that some USB device driver runs as "nobody:nobody" process having access only to selected syscalls related to its functions. Even if it has vulnerability, you won't go anywhere from there.

Modularity and very granular access controls are the "secret" to secure system.

And the most privileged part of the kernel could be so small that it could be verified with advanced methods, basically proving its correctness.

Something like that:

1. Proceed through ordinary steps until account screen.

2. Choose "Set up for work or school".

3. Choose "Sign-in options" and select "Domain Join".

4. Enter username, password, recovery questions.

That's it. Despite the name, the domain join is not happening at installation time. I assume user can join domain once the installation is complete, but it's not enforced or even signalled in any way.

What that PE certification will check? That guy knows how to write unit tests? Well, that's not much. Who will write certification? Where's that genius, why he's hiding from the rest of us?

Maybe building is figured out. I don't know. I still see bridges failing and buildings crushed, so apparently it's not perfect. But I do know that programming is not figured out. Absolutely not. We can apply tremendous effort, pay billions and produce some simple firmware which can be uploaded to a martian rover. But that doesn't scale to the rest of industry.

    RMDIR [/S] [/Q] [drive:]path

Honestly it's the same for me. Taskbar is a bit weird and start menu is a bit weird, but I was able to turn off unwanted features, so it's not bad right now.

I'm mostly Linux user and my Windows usage is more about gaming, but I did some programming with it as well.

Also this vulnerability is not strictly about mptcp, although the exploitability is not clear.

That's just some rough reasoning in my head.

Also when you install third-party software, 100% of them will support Ubuntu. That's more about workstation usage, though. But having tested platform matters.

I don't think that's true.

In medicine, science often doesn't know how specific drug really is working. They just do a lot of tests and if these tests are positive enough, they ship it. I think it's good analogy. Biology is very complicated and it's out of our grasp to truly understand how various parts of it interact with each other on so many levels. But if something helps, it's stupid not to use it just because we don't fully understand it. Sometimes it bites. Sometimes it bites 30 years later. But we still follow that approach.

Software is similar. The complexity of the systems we build is enormous, when we're taking in account all the moving parts. I just read that someone emits radiowaves toggling memory bit and ex-filtrating information. How can you account for that? Probably you can't. But we still need software for good things.

Imagine that the whole city has to install iron doors and window grilles, because wooden doors and glass windows are not safe enough anymore.

That's a lot of work, but is it productive in the end? Probably not.

With AI it's the same. World was fine with lax security approach before. Today it is not fine. Tomorrow we might need to prove every code line before shipping, will that be more productive? Hell, no.

I guess it's fine if one specializes on C++ programming only. But when one needs to use different languages and C++ is used sporadically, I feel like it might be substantially harder than other languages.

Standard UUID length is 36 characters. So you have identifiers 11 characters less and they're actually a tiny bit more readable and writeable if you decide to type them for some reason.