On Mon, Nov 27 2017, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 02:33:59AM +0100, Stefan Sperling wrote:
>> Most people I've talked to seem to be OK with never exposing
>> these secrets to userland in the first place.
Makes sense.
> Better diff for the wireless part.
> WEP keys showed up a
On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 02:33:59AM +0100, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> Most people I've talked to seem to be OK with never exposing
> these secrets to userland in the first place.
Better diff for the wireless part.
WEP keys showed up as 0x0... instead of '' in
the previous diff.
Index: ieee80211_
On 2017/11/27 11:22, Peter Hessler wrote:
> :retrieving revision 1.319
> :diff -u -p -r1.319 ip_carp.c
> :--- netinet/ip_carp.c21 Nov 2017 09:08:55 - 1.319
> :+++ netinet/ip_carp.c27 Nov 2017 01:29:34 -
> :@@ -2158,9 +2158,8 @@ carp_ioctl(struct ifnet *ifp, u_long cmd
>
On 2017 Nov 27 (Mon) at 16:27:57 +0100 (+0100), Stefan Sperling wrote:
:On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 11:22:46AM +0100, Peter Hessler wrote:
:> This hides the username that is used, not the password/authkey. Is the
:> username private information?
:
:Yes it seems best to avoid exposing these.
:We cannot
On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 11:22:46AM +0100, Peter Hessler wrote:
> This hides the username that is used, not the password/authkey. Is the
> username private information?
Yes it seems best to avoid exposing these.
We cannot assume that telcos follow best practices of data hygiene.
Quoting naddy@ fr
On 2017 Nov 27 (Mon) at 02:33:59 +0100 (+0100), Stefan Sperling wrote:
:On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 01:31:17AM +0100, Stefan Sperling wrote:
:> On Sun, Nov 26, 2017 at 06:17:14PM +0100, Jeremie Courreges-Anglas wrote:
:> >
:> > I don't think anything has been committed regarding this issue, right?
:>
On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 01:31:17AM +0100, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 26, 2017 at 06:17:14PM +0100, Jeremie Courreges-Anglas wrote:
> >
> > I don't think anything has been committed regarding this issue, right?
>
> Nope.
>
> I've been discussing this with people in person.
> Will summar
On Sun, Nov 26, 2017 at 06:17:14PM +0100, Jeremie Courreges-Anglas wrote:
>
> I don't think anything has been committed regarding this issue, right?
Nope.
I've been discussing this with people in person.
Will summarize those discussions and send a new diff soon.
(We've just got net in the hut!)
Jeremie Courreges-Anglas wrote:
>
> I don't think anything has been committed regarding this issue, right?
this looks ok to me.
I don't think anything has been committed regarding this issue, right?
On Sat, Nov 18 2017, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> On 2017/11/17 18:28, Ted Unangst wrote:
>> Stefan Sperling wrote:
>> > Or is modifying ifconfig sufficient?
>> > We are more concerned about textual display rather than the
>> >
On 2017/11/17 18:28, Ted Unangst wrote:
> Stefan Sperling wrote:
> > Or is modifying ifconfig sufficient?
> > We are more concerned about textual display rather than the
> > kernel/userland ioctl boundary, correct?
> >
> > The option list for ifconfig is [-AaC]. Plenty of letters available.
> > We
Stefan Sperling wrote:
> Or is modifying ifconfig sufficient?
> We are more concerned about textual display rather than the
> kernel/userland ioctl boundary, correct?
>
> The option list for ifconfig is [-AaC]. Plenty of letters available.
> We could add:
>
>-P Show authentication details su
On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 01:20:53PM -, Christian Weisgerber wrote:
> On 2017-11-17, Stefan Sperling wrote:
>
> > This diff makes the WPA key available only if the interface is in
> > debug mode (suggestion by phessler). If this is acceptable then I
> > can also try to squeeze a hint into the i
On 2017-11-17, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> This diff makes the WPA key available only if the interface is in
> debug mode (suggestion by phessler). If this is acceptable then I
> can also try to squeeze a hint into the ifconfig man page so that
> this mechanism can be discovered by those who don't r
On Fri, Nov 17 2017, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> There have been several instances of people mailing out WPA keys as
> part of ifconfig output, e.g. in bug reports. This happens when you
> run ifconfig as root and copy/paste without thinking.
>
> I see no real need to ever show the key except in circ
Stefan Sperling(s...@stsp.name) on 2017.11.17 11:41:57 +0100:
> There have been several instances of people mailing out WPA keys as
> part of ifconfig output, e.g. in bug reports. This happens when you
> run ifconfig as root and copy/paste without thinking.
>
> I see no real need to ever show the
On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 11:41:57AM +0100, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> There have been several instances of people mailing out WPA keys as
> part of ifconfig output, e.g. in bug reports. This happens when you
> run ifconfig as root and copy/paste without thinking.
>
> I see no real need to ever show t
There have been several instances of people mailing out WPA keys as
part of ifconfig output, e.g. in bug reports. This happens when you
run ifconfig as root and copy/paste without thinking.
I see no real need to ever show the key except in circumstances where
the key needs to be legitimately passe
18 matches
Mail list logo
