bclemens
Joined 9 years ago
Karma
241
Submissions
54
Member since
Mar 29
Recent submissions
Comment · 1 year ago
It appears to be "The Friendly Orange Glow: The Untold Story of the PLATO System and the Dawn of Cyberculture".
Comment · 1 year ago
Of course! It's easy to forget he was a guard at one of America's most notorious concentration camps, Guantanamo Bay. It's foolish to think of him only as a Fox News personality.
Comment · 1 year ago
They are not directly comparable. Nebula is a mesh VPN. Wireguard can be used as a building block for a mesh VPN (as it is in Tailscale), but it does not have that function organically.
I have tried Tailscale / Headscale and did not find the overhead worth it. Both can saturate a 10Gbps link and that's all I need right now. Nebula's much simpler to administer. The configuration's spelled out in the client configs and in the certificates you provision. If you're already using some form of configuration management, it's quite easy to make changes. If you require a Web UI, Tailscale / Zerotier / etc may be better. There is a company that provides a Nebula-based service with a Web UI but I haven't tried it.
Comment · 1 year ago
Also consider Nebula: https://github.com/slackhq/nebula
ZeroTier does not use an OSI approved open-source license. It is under a freedom-restricting "Business Source License". Nebula is MIT licensed.
Nebula is much simpler and in most cases faster than ZeroTier.
Comment · 2 years ago
Nope, it wouldn't have been in RHEL 10 or any of the rebuilds. CentOS Stream 10 already branched from Fedora / ELN. The closest it would have gotten is a Fedora ELN compose, and it's doubtful it would have remained undiscovered long enough to end up in CentOS Stream 11.
Comment · 2 years ago
Ha, fun to see this again! Back before everything was HTTPS, it was fun to use the Browser Exploitation Framework (https://beefproject.com) which had a script included that did this. Though in those cases I wasn't in control of the gateway, so ARP spoofing was required to get other devices to route through me.
Comment · 2 years ago
Rocky Linux has /etc/redhat-release as well. Reason being that some software checks that file for version / compatibility information, and we want to avoid breaking it. (They should be checking /etc/os-release, but it is what it is.)
Comment · 2 years ago
It is not. openSUSE is a very different distro, though it does use RPM packages.
SuSE Liberty Linux is, I believe: https://www.suse.com/products/suse-liberty-linux/
Comment · 2 years ago
The vagueness is not intentional, it's vague only because at the time it was written we hadn't decided on a particular source. For Rocky Linux, RHEL cloud instances are currently the primary source.
Not every RHEL binary is GPL licensed, but all the packages we distribute have an open source license permitting such redistribution. There are a few left out, for example some Red Hat proprietary artwork, tools, etc.
I often get a bit of a feel of the Monty Python "Nudge Nudge Wink Wink" sketch from talking with folks who think we're doing something legally dubious.
Comment · 2 years ago
Happily surprised to see this hit the front page! If anyone is interested, I keep track of some statistics regarding Rocky Linux usage at https://rocky-stats.tiuxo.com/auto.html
Note that those statistics are only really useful for determining relative usage of Enterprise Linux distros as it's derived from EPEL logs. I haven't gotten around to attempting to derive statistics from the Rocky Linux logs because it's an intimidating amount of data.
(It's supposed to be automatic, but it seems the GitHub CI is having an issue with one of the dependencies for the past week. Guess now's a good time to fix it, and maybe make the page look more aesthetically pleasing...)
Comment · 2 years ago
There's no mystery or secret about where we get sources: https://rockylinux.org/news/keeping-open-source-open/
TLDR: UBIs and cloud instances.
Comment · 2 years ago
We aim to be as transparent as possible. The only information that we don't share publicly is the obvious stuff (PII, sensitive infrastructure information, etc). The information regarding source access / challenges / etc is available at https://rockylinux.org/news/keeping-open-source-open/.
Comment · 2 years ago
We have a whole blog post about exactly that, here: https://rockylinux.org/news/keeping-open-source-open/
Comment · 2 years ago
We thank our upstream often, in person, in social media, etc.
We sponsor the Fedora Flock conference, the only opportunity to fiscally support Fedora, and will continue to do so. Same with the CentOS Connect conference. Those checks get written directly to Red Hat, by the way.
Given you work for Red Hat, we can even say we've paid you a little! :)
Comment · 2 years ago
Projects have always done this, as Red Hat has always been rather litigious and it's unwise to give them any unnecessary ground for legal complaints. The common euphemism has been "Prominent North American Enterprise Linux Vendor" since the early days of CentOS.
Back in 2007, CentOS's self-description was "CentOS is an Enterprise-class Linux Distribution derived from sources freely provided to the public by a prominent North American Enterprise Linux vendor. CentOS conforms fully with the upstream vendor's redistribution policy and aims to be 100% binary compatible. (CentOS mainly changes packages to remove upstream vendor branding and artwork.) CentOS is free".
@tiuxo.com on BlueSky