On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 08:41:10PM -0700, Kjell Wooding wrote:
> > Note that this assumes that there is no backdoor in random(6) (or
> > arc4random_uniform, which it calls) designed to prevent the source file
> > with the backdoor from being selected with the above command.
> >
> >
> That's true.
[IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE]
KAPIDA VDEME FIRSATI - AYNI G\N KARGO
ULTRASONÄ°K KOVUCULAR ZEHÄ°R DEÄÄ°LDÄ°R VLD\RMEZ
HAYATINIZI KOLAYLAÅTIRIR ve S\REKLÄ° TEMÄ°ZLÄ°K SAÄLAR
Ä°NSANLARA VE EVCÄ°L HAYVANLARA EN UFAK BÄ°R OLUMSUZ ETKÄ°SÄ° YOKTUR
FARE KOVUCULAR - BVCEK KOVUCULAR - KUÅ KOVUCULA
> Note that this assumes that there is no backdoor in random(6) (or
> arc4random_uniform, which it calls) designed to prevent the source file
> with the backdoor from being selected with the above command.
>
>
That's true. I would submit a patch, but it would require every developer to
carry around
You can have the card if you want it. Contact me offline, and
we can discuss on ways to get it to you. I no longer have time
to hack on openbsd.
Er, that would need other changes as well. Ignore me...
On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 10:12:07PM +, Nicholas Marriott wrote:
> Or could use stat(1) to put the item to be sorted at the start, albeit
> ending up with a different format from ls:
>
> find -print0 | xargs -0 -r stat -f '%-40N %-10
Or could use stat(1) to put the item to be sorted at the start, albeit
ending up with a different format from ls:
find -print0 | xargs -0 -r stat -f '%-40N %-10Su %-10Sg %Sp' | sort
On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 08:53:39PM +0100, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 12:08:33AM +0100, In
On 31/12/2010, at 4:03 AM, Mike Belopuhov wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 11:01 +1000, David Gwynne wrote:
>> ive had no takers on testing.
>>
>> i cant see how raid and sas events will race in the current code,
>> so i think the 1second sleep to avoid confusion is unecessary. i
>> will put it in
On 31/12/2010, at 3:51 AM, Mike Belopuhov wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 24, 2010 at 16:09 +1000, David Gwynne wrote:
>> i can reliably produce a situation where an io on a disk attached
>> to mpii(4) never completes. this implements timeouts on scsi io so
>> we can recover from this situation.
>>
>> ok?
>>
On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 12:08:33AM +0100, Ingo Schwarze wrote:
> I consider this a bug in security(8).
>
> The following is the best i could come up with so far; make sure
> to wear your sed-peril-proof sunglasses before reading the patch.
>
> This still mangles the file name, but at least you h
On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 10:02 AM, Ted Unangst wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 6:08 PM, Ingo Schwarze wrote:
>> I consider this a bug in security(8).
>>
>> The following is the best i could come up with so far; make sure
>> to wear your sed-peril-proof sunglasses before reading the patch.
>>
>> T
On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 11:02 AM, Theo de Raadt
wrote:
>> On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 6:08 PM, Ingo Schwarze wrote:
>> > I consider this a bug in security(8).
>> >
>> > The following is the best i could come up with so far; make sure
>> > to wear your sed-peril-proof sunglasses before reading the pat
> On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 6:08 PM, Ingo Schwarze wrote:
> > I consider this a bug in security(8).
> >
> > The following is the best i could come up with so far; make sure
> > to wear your sed-peril-proof sunglasses before reading the patch.
> >
> > This still mangles the file name, but at least yo
On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 6:08 PM, Ingo Schwarze wrote:
> I consider this a bug in security(8).
>
> The following is the best i could come up with so far; make sure
> to wear your sed-peril-proof sunglasses before reading the patch.
>
> This still mangles the file name, but at least you have a chanc
On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 11:01 +1000, David Gwynne wrote:
> ive had no takers on testing.
>
> i cant see how raid and sas events will race in the current code,
> so i think the 1second sleep to avoid confusion is unecessary. i
> will put it in and deal with fallout if it comes up.
>
i didn't look
On Fri, Dec 24, 2010 at 16:09 +1000, David Gwynne wrote:
> i can reliably produce a situation where an io on a disk attached
> to mpii(4) never completes. this implements timeouts on scsi io so
> we can recover from this situation.
>
> ok?
>
although, you've already committed the change, i have
Hello, t...@!
I've tweaked i386 Makefile to fail if genassym.sh fails.
It's usually hard to notice when it comes before the bunch of
make output of mkdep commandline.
Index: conf/Makefile.i386
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/sys/arch/i386/con
Hello Ingo,
schwa...@usta.de (Ingo Schwarze), 2010.12.30 (Thu) 00:08 (CET):
> I consider this a bug in security(8).
>
> The following is the best i could come up with so far; make sure
> to wear your sed-peril-proof sunglasses before reading the patch.
Would have taken me ages to come up with
BliE>i se Nova godina puni smo oD
ekivanja i snova...
Saberite utiske iz prethodne i pripremite se za sledeDu...
'...Preleti beskonaD
nost i pobedi vreme i maštu, ali nikad ne zaboravi
kako se koraD
a po zemlji'
Miroslav AntiD
SreDne praznike, uspešnu i nasmejanu 2011. E>eli Vam
Vaš T
On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 09:38:41AM +0100, Janne Johansson wrote:
> > without a 'hint' (true or fake), where would you start auditing the
> > code? It's just too much.
>
> Ted Unangst already solved that for all the potential lookers:
>
> Quote from http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-misc&m=1244135339134
2010/12/21 Kurt Knochner
> 2010/12/21 Theo de Raadt
> > > regarding the allegations about a backdoor beeing planted into OpenBSD,
> I
> > > did a code review myself [...]
> >
> > It is unfortunate that it required an allegation of this sort for
> > people to get to the point where they stop blin
20 matches
Mail list logo
