[Fri Mar 31 15:25:03 CST 2006]
A good friend of mine just told me about EasyUbuntu, an easy way to add support to your Ubuntu installation for things such as MP3 and other
non-free formats, libdvdcss, Real Player, Flash, Java, etc.
{link to this story}
[Wed Mar 29 16:54:21 CST 2006]
Peter Chabada wrote a few days
ago an excellent piece suggesting more than forty ways to improve the Linux
desktop experience, including things like adding a multi-rename feature
to rename multiple files using regular expressions, improving keyboard
navigation in Nautilus,
an easy installation of multimedia codecs by showing a dialog with information
on how to install them instead of just showing an error, automatic pause of
music playback when the user hits the mute button, better song notification
on the GNOME bar, better progress notification for certain operations such
as burning or downloading, editing root-owned files from within certain
applications such as Gedit,
better cellphone and PDA synchronization, etc. All in all, it is a pretty
good article that shows the enormous benefits of constructive criticism.
{link to this story}
[Wed Mar 29 14:30:46 CST 2006]
NewsForge published yesterday an interview with Theo de Raadt, the project leader
of OpenBSD, that contains some good
comments about secure coding, among other things:
We've had 10 years or nearly fanatical devotion to anything which can make
OpenBSD more secure. A very important part of that is that we have not been
afraid to completely overhaul anything even if it breaks backward
compatibility. Secondly, when we have found a flaw in any part of the system
we have assumed that the same mistake was made elsewhere, and gone on a hunt
to fix them all. Thirdly, we have developed and incorporated a collection of
methods that make software flaws very difficult to attack.
The important degail is that in all three of these areas we have not only
been fanatical, but pretty much first. Other vendors are not treating their
source code the way we treat ours —with distrust, knowing that we should
always actively churn it, so that it can slowly evolve into a better state.
The same interview contains a couple of great links (one to
an article published by Wikipedia on OpenBSD Security Features and the other to de Raadt's own
Exploit
Mitigation Tecniques paper) that are well worth a look. Of course,
Theo de Raadt being Theo de Raadt, he could not avoid some controversial and
highly critical comments about other people:
Nvidia did not give anyone
documentation. Instead, they expect people to load a gigantic blob of binary
code into their kernel, and just be happy with that. Some Linux people in
Germany reverse-engineered the driver years ago, but the rough story I heard
is that Nvidia asked them to stop, and they did. This just astounds me!
In any case, Jonathan Gray (who started this effort) asked for their help
with a few problematic technical details, and they refused. I could not
believe that, so I asked as well —and they refused again. These are
Linux developers, basically placing the community in a situation where they
have to run a binary blob of unknown code from a vendor, instead of sticking
to their guns about open source? I must admit, I just don't understand
some people. They must have much more flexibility to their belief systems
than I have.
Well, yeah, perhaps they have much more flexible belief systems or perhaps
they just take threats of legal action more seriously. If de Raadt does not
give a rat's ass about that, good for him! However, I find it difficult to
moralize about something like that. It is other people's lives, after all.
I am more willing to accept his criticism of the vendors who benefit from
OpenSSH without contributing much to
its development:
If I add up everything we have ever gotten in exchange for our efforts with
OpenSSH, it might amount to $1,000. This all came from individuals. For
our work on OpenSSH, companies using OpenSSH have never given us a cent.
What about companies that incorporate OpenSSH directly into their products,
saving themselves millions of dollars? Companies such as Cisco, Sun, SGI, HP, IBM, Siemens, a raft of
medoum-sized firewall companies —we have not received a cent. Or from
Linux vendors? Not a cent.
(...)
If you want to judge any entity particularly harshly, judge Sun. Yearly they hold interoperability events, for NFS and
other protocols, and they include SSH implementation tests as well. Twice
we asked them to cover the travel and accommodation costs for a developer to
come to their event, and they refused. Considering that their SunSSH is
directly based on our code, that is flat out insulting. Shame on you Sun,
shame, shame, shame.
I will say it here —if an OpenSSH hole is found that applies to SunSSH,
Sun will not be informed. Or maybe that has happened already.
Let us forget about the last threat. As far as I know, the OpenSSH guys
do not inform
any vendor when an OpenSSH hole applies to their own
software. Actually, what tends to happen is that they announce publicly
that there is a hole in OpenSSH (well, publicly in their own internal
lists before it is spead out there to the general public) and Sun's, SGI's,
HP's or whichever engineers check out to see if their own implementation is
also affected by the bug. Still, the point is well taken, I think, and de
Raadt is right to point out the selfishness of these vendors.
{
link to this story}
[Wed Mar 29 09:23:03 CST 2006]
I just came across a short
piece published on DebianHelp explaining how to remove Linux from DOS
or Windows (well, in reality how to get rid of the information in the MBR
so you can repartition and reinstall from scratch) that includes some great
tips on how to zero out your MBR both from Linux and DOS:
From the Linux partition:
dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/hda bs=512 count=1
From DOS (now, this is an interesting one!):
debug
f 9000:0 200 0
a (to start assembly mode)
mov dx,9000
mov es,dx
xor bx,bx
mov cx,0001
mov dx,0080
mov ax,0301
int 13
int 20
ENTER (to exit assembly mode)
g (to execute)
q (to quit)
{
link to this story}
[Wed Mar 29 08:46:40 CST 2006]
Harry Fuecks has published an interesting piece on Evaluating PHP
Applications with some good tips on checking their security track,
auditing their code, finding out about scalability issues, bug tracking and
code management, etc. Along the way, we learn about functions as useful as
mysql_escape_string,
mysql_real_escape_string, addslashes and htmlspecialchars. While not a very in depth
analysis, it is not bad as an introduction to the topic.
{link to this story}
[Thu Mar 9 09:45:54 CST 2006]
I just came across the Ubuntu Sources.list generator, which allows you to generate an ubuntu
sources.list file from your preferred set of repositories
by simply checking the boxes in the web interface. Pretty nifty and painless.
By the way, here are a couple of links to serve me as reminders:
Ubuntu community participation
Ubuntu MOTU/Packages/Candidates
{link to this story}
[Mon Mar 6 07:35:02 CST 2006]
The O'Reilly Network has published an interesting
article about what corporate projects could learn from open source that
makes for a good read. The following is a good example:
Say a junior developer is working on a bug fix, and realizes that the entire
design of the part of the software he's working on is flawed. He comes up
with an improvement and brings it up with his boss. If this is a typical
corporate project, it's likely that this junior person will see his idea shot
down almost immediately. His boss will brush him off, saying that it will
take too long to implement, or that it's going to be too hard a change to
make, and nobody else on the team will even hear about it. But what his
boss is really thinking is, "How can this junior guy spot a mistake that none
of the senior people caught? He must not understand all of the details".
Say that same junior developer later that week brings it up with a senior
team member. The senior guy is in a good mood, and entertains the thought.
Suddenly he realizes that there really is a serious problem with the project!
He goes to the boss, but this time the boss listens. With the senior person's
backing, the suggestion has a lot more credibility. Now it will be heard and
acted upon.
This is no way to run a software project. Good ideas come from everyone,
not just the senior team members. But corporate environments frequently
discourage innovation from the "bottom of the food chain". In fact, many
corporate environments discurage innovation altogether, dismissing it as
risky and potentially expensive. There's often a sense that no new innovation
should be adopted unless it has been successfully implemented in another
project. This is yet another way that team members' opinions can be squelched
on corporate projects. In the end, many bright (and often young) project
team members routinely come up with new and insightful ideas, only to have
them shot down because they didn't follow propoer channels or have enough
seniority —or because a senior manager simply didn't understand them.
{
link to this story}