i’m lizard

  • 0 Posts
  • 16 Comments
Joined 2 months ago
cake
Cake day: June 21st, 2024

help-circle



  • Requiring agreement to some unspecified ever-changing terms of service in order to use the product you just bought, especially when use of such products is required in the modern world. Google and Apple in particular are more or less able to trivially deny any non-technical person access to smartphones and many things associated with them like access to mobile banking. Microsoft is heading that way with Windows requiring MS accounts, too, though they’re not completely there yet.



  • Personally, I do believe that rootless Docker/Podman have a strong enough security boundary for personal/individual self-hosting where you have decent trust in the software you’re running. Linux privilege escalation and container escape exploits fetch decent amounts of money on the exploit market, and nobody’s gonna waste them on some people running software ending in *arr when Zerodium will pay five figures for a local privilege escalation or container escape. If you’re running a business or you might be targeted for whatever reason (journalist or whatever) then that doesn’t apply.

    If you want more security, there are container runtimes that do cooler security stuff under the hood, like Firecracker/Kata Containers implementing a managed VM, or Google’s gVisor which very strongly intercepts kernel syscalls and essentially reimplements Linux in userspace. Those are used by AWS and Google Cloud respectively. You can integrate those into Docker, though not all networking/etc options are supported.



  • My suggestion is to use system management tools like Foreman. It has a “content views” mechanism that can do more or less what you want. There’s a bunch of other tools like that along the lines of Uyuni. Of course, those tools have a lot of features, so it might be overkill for your case, but a lot of those features will probably end up useful anyway if you have that many hosts.

    With the way Debian/Ubuntu APT repos are set up, if you take a copy of /dists/$DISTRO_VERSION as downloaded from a mirror at any given moment and serve it to a particular server, that’s going to end up with apt update && apt upgrade installing those identical versions, provided that the actual package files in /pool are still available. You can set up caching proxies for that.

    I remember my DIY hodgepodge a decade ago ultimately just being a daily cronjob that pulls in the current distro (let’s say bookworm) and their associated -updates and -security repos from an upstream rsync-capable mirror, then after checking a killswitch and making sure things aren’t currently on fire, it does rsync -rva tier2 tier3; rsync -rva tier1 tier2; rsync -rva upstream/bookworm tier1. Machines are configured to pull and update from tier1 (first 20%)/tier2 (second 20%)/tier3 (rest) appropriately on a regular basis. The files in /pool were served by apt-cacher-ng, but I don’t know if that’s still the cool option nowadays (you will need some kind of local caching for those as old files may disappear without notice).



  • For that card, you probably have to set the radeon.si_support=0 amdgpu.si_support=1 kernel options to allow amdgpu to work. I don’t have a TrueNAS system laying around so I don’t know what the idiomatic way to change them is.

    Using amdgpu on that card has been considered experimental ever since it was added like 6 years ago, and nobody has invested any real efforts to stabilize it. It’s entirely possible that amdgpu on that card is simply never gonna work. But yeah I think the radeon driver isn’t really fully functional anymore either, so I guess it’s worth a shot…



  • Company offering new-age antivirus solutions, which is to say that instead of being mostly signature-based, it tries to look at application behavior instead. If Word was exploited because some user opened not_a_virus_please_open.docx from their spam folder, Word might be exploited and end up running some malware that tries to encrypt the entire drive. It’s supposed to sniff out that 1. Word normally opens and saves like one document at a time and 2. some unknown program is being overly active. And so it should stop that and ring some very loud alarm bells at the IT department.

    Basically they doubled down on the heuristics-based detection and by that, they claim to be able to recognize and stop all kinds of new malware that they haven’t seen yet. My experience is that they’re always the outlier on the top-end of false positives in business AV tests (eg AV-Comparatives Q2 2024) and their advantage has mostly disappeared since every AV has implemented that kind of behavior-based detection nowadays.




  • vim has better default keybindings/commands that allow for less movement of your hands. Nowadays, in reasonably current versions of nano, that’s mostly it. The main difference is nano is somewhat usable but extremely inefficient unless you learn it, while vim forces you to learn it to get anything done at all, which also pushes people to spend a bit of time learning it in general.

    If you’re sure of the numbers you’re using, vim’s ability to repeat commands is also helpful. In practice I find that it’s really hard to make use of them beyond low numbers, where nano can still achieve things in similar amounts of keypresses. Eg something to delete 3 words like <escape>3dwi can be done similar with a sequence like Alt-A ^→ ^→ ^→ ^K in nano. Make it 20 words and nano is going to be a lot slower, but that’s quite an uncommon action.

    But the practice is that nano users don’t spend time learning any of that and just hold delete until the words are gone, which takes forever. Everyone that can do basics in vim quickly learns that you can dw words away and make it 3dw to delete 3 of them. The default, easiest to use & access tool for any given situation gets blamed not just for its flaws, but also for the users that don’t want to spend time learning any tool.