https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2017/04/mozilla-microsoft-rebuilding-their-browsers-foundations-without-anyone-noticing/

@ntozier said in HPE Sells OpenStack and Cloud Foundry Business to Suse:

HP seems to be selling off a lot of stuff recently...

Definitely trimming the fat if nothing else.

@coliver said in Red Hat Virtualization Announced, Rebranding RHEV:

@scottalanmiller said in Red Hat Virtualization Announced, Rebranding RHEV:

@coliver said in Red Hat Virtualization Announced, Rebranding RHEV:

Wasn't Redhat supporting KVM? Or is this the commercial version of KVM?

This is RH's packaged KVM product. KVM is just the hypervisor, not the virtualization platform (think ESXi instead of vSphere, Xen instead of XenServer, etc.)

Ah, ok that makes sense. So this is an appliance or OS version of KVM. Thanks for the clarification.

Ya kind of like how they took Gluster and made Red Hat Storage. So if you want the glusterfs-server package, it's not in the repos.....annoying.

Hmmm, if he cares so much about security he should disable the Universe repository, it's full of security holes. Essentially, installing anything from there is an exercise in installing a backdoor.

Of course, there's not much choice, you want that software to be available. Though choice 😉

@dafyre said:

FTA, this looks like it only affects the SSH clients... Right?

"The problem involved a bug that exposed a memory leak to a malicious SSH server," Cox explained. "Because the data in question didn't cross any trust or execution boundaries, the malicious server could get the client to possibly leak sensitive authentication key data."

I think it's both. I ran my update playbook and everything was patched within about 3 minutes 🙂

@dafyre said:

It's the beginning of Skynet.

Already exists actually.

@scottalanmiller said:

@Dashrender said:

@scottalanmiller said:

@Dashrender said:

@scottalanmiller said:

@Dashrender said:

@JaredBusch said:

@Dashrender said:

It's already been shown to them how cars can be completely taken over via the internet. I think the cellular vendor in that case turn on a firewall that disabled this - for now.

That has nothing to do with a standardized OS system to run vehicles.

I was mainly referencing Johnhooks comment about not trusting car companies that much.

I agree that this project can only be a good thing - hopefully more manufacturers will join and we will all have safer, more secure systems in our future cars.

But if too many join in, then we will have a single OS and a single point of attack for would be attackers.

Is that really a concern? While there are many versions of Linux, How many servers are running the most popular versus how many cars there?

Seems like it would be a concern of the utmost importance. Creating a single attack target that is primarily maintained by consumers is what caught Windows, right?

Sure, but cars today aren't maintained at all - by anyone.

Nor do most have a single, shared OS or exposed APIs.

I'll give you they don't have a single shared OS, though exposed (sure not over the internet) APIs, it seems there are more exposed that we realize, just most require local access or something like bluetooth.

I find this one a little surprising. When I worked on Wall St. we were rolling out containers in 2006. If these banks are just talking about "looking into" containers now, they are a full decade behind where we were.

I read the article and it says that it is using Webkit and not using any proxy.

@stus Thanks for popping in!