346 karma · joined April 3, 2019
Are you saying that even with the Raspberry Pi we are still at the mercy of the hardware manufacturer when it comes to OS images?
In the former case the thing that needs to be removed is the entirety of the OS (and if that proves to be impossible, the device is returned or discarded), and in the latter it's a scan of all apps and removal of all unnecessary apps, my grandma does not need Samsung Galaxy Games, thank you very much.
This sounds really plausible. A change to the C toolchain/library (for example, specialized/inlined memcpy) may affect binary sizes significantly, and may change the behavior of something the C standard leaves undefined (for example, memcpy with overlapping arguments).
User=per-service-user
ExecStart=!podman-wrapper ...
where podman-wrapper passes `--user=1000:1000 --userns=auto:uidmapping=1000:$SERVICE_UID:1,gidmapping=1000:$SERVICE_GID:1` (where the UID/GID are set based on the $USER environment variable). Each container runs as 1000:1000 inside the container, which is mapped to the correct user on the host.edit: Seems to be a network problem. We can't connect to them from Bulgaria, but we can connect to them from the US.
A while ago I generated a gigabit RSA public key. It is available at [3]. From what I remember, the format is: 4-byte little-endian key size in bytes, then little-endian key, then little-endian inverse of key mod 256**bytes. The public exponent is 3.
[1] https://eprint.iacr.org/2017/351.pdf
This post is about memory management and doesn't seem to be concerned much about safety in any way. In C3, does anything prevent me from doing this:
fn int* example(int input)
{
@pool()
{
int* temp_variable = mem::tnew(int);
*temp_variable = input;
return temp_variable;
};
}Except for symlinks. `fgetxattr` requires a file opened for read or write, but symlinks can only be opened as `O_PATH`.
I wonder how many other security disasters it contains that nobody has discovered yet.
- In GitHub, forks of public repositories are themselves public repositories.
- GitHub repositories can be cloned, which is a form of distribution.
- Therefore any fork that implements, for example, a change to the programming language itself, but still uses the name "Rust", is distributing a modified version of the programming language in a manner that is not allowed.
I sincerely hope that this is not the interpretation taken by the Rust Foundation, but I cannot know for sure. It seems very open to selective enforcement.
> Publicly distributing a modified version of the Rust programming language, compiler, or the Cargo package manager, provided that the modifications are limited to:
> - code adjustments for the purpose of porting to a different platform, architecture, or system, or integrating the software with the packaging system of that platform
It looks like distributing a modified version with any change that isn't related to compatibility with a different platform/architecture/system is not allowed. This would probably make almost all GitHub forks of Rust non-compliant.
Come on, vpternlog* is not obscure. It subsumes _all_ bitwise instructions, even loading the constant (-1) into a register.
That being said, I am a W^X person so I don't really like some of the (x86_64-specific) aspects of their plugin systems. I need to publish my #ifdef-it-out-with-fire patch at some point...
Assigning a CVE to every second commit and refusing to assign CVEs to unfixed issues doesn't seem like correct usage of the CVE system. I expect that most Linux CVEs will never get a proper analysis or a CVSS rating.
To me it sounds plausible that the design goal of the Linux CNA is to show that CVEs don't meaningfully apply to the Linux kernel. Given how dependent on context the impact of some kernel bugs can be, if we were assigning CVSS scores for the worst case, practically all kernel bugs would be at least a 9.8/10.