After a weekly patching and several boots, what Ed suggested continues
to work. This includes e-mail, browser, dnf upgrade, dnf install, zoom,
and video downloads (via Firefox add-on and via command line). As best
as I can see, nothing got broke and everything works as it should. So
I'm tagg
Privacy Extensions for Stateless Address Autoconfiguration in IPv6
On Mon, 7 Dec 2020 at 05:18, Ed Greshko wrote:
> On 07/12/2020 11:11, Tim via users wrote:
> > On Sun, 2020-12-06 at 15:43 -0400, George N. White III wrote:
> >> As more systems use IPv6, bad actors will have to collect
> >> acti
On 12/7/20 4:50 PM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
Man of La Mancha is a musical based on Don Quixote. I wouldn't regard
it as the same thing, but it's a matter of opinion.
Neither do I, but at least you can get an idea of what the story's about
by watching it.
___
On Mon, 2020-12-07 at 12:41 -0700, Joe Zeff wrote:
> On 12/7/20 4:45 AM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> > On Sun, 2020-12-06 at 22:06 -0700, home user wrote:
> > > Is Don Quixote available as an English-language movie?
> > Not really. There are several Spanish versions (see IMDB) but the book
> > is
On 12/7/20 4:45 AM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
On Sun, 2020-12-06 at 22:06 -0700, home user wrote:
Is Don Quixote available as an English-language movie?
Not really. There are several Spanish versions (see IMDB) but the book
is so expansive that it's hard to imagine a successful movie
adaptatio
On Mon, 2020-12-07 at 14:08 +0200, Iosif Fettich wrote:
> although this is as off-topic already as it could be, without being marked as
> such in the subject. Go for
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man_of_La_Mancha_(film)
>
> See the film, if you can find it. You won't regret.
I know of at le
Hi there,
although this is as off-topic already as it could be, without being marked as
such in the subject. Go for
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man_of_La_Mancha_(film)
See the film, if you can find it. You won't regret.
Best regards,
Iosif Fettich
On Mon, 7 Dec 2020, Patrick O'Callaghan
On Sun, 2020-12-06 at 22:06 -0700, home user wrote:
> Is Don Quixote available as an English-language movie?
Not really. There are several Spanish versions (see IMDB) but the book
is so expansive that it's hard to imagine a successful movie
adaptation. It would probably have to be a mini-series at
On 07/12/2020 11:11, Tim via users wrote:
On Sun, 2020-12-06 at 15:43 -0400, George N. White III wrote:
As more systems use IPv6, bad actors will have to collect
active IPv6 addresses. You may be one of the first to see that
start.
I have to wonder how that's going to go. With IPv4 most peop
On 07/12/2020 13:06, home user wrote:
I'm going back to thinking of a firewall as that part of my ol' jalopy that
separates me (in the driver's seat) from the engine compartment! :)
Well, that is the origin of the term.
(Don Quixote)
Is Don Quixote available as an English-language movie?
On 12/5/20 11:20 PM, Ed Greshko wrote:
If you want to make your system "invisible" and won't be running
any services you should simply change the zone of your internet
interface from "public" to "drop".
firewall-cmd --permanent --zone=drop --change-interface=eno1
firewall-cmd --reload
-bash.
On Sun, 2020-12-06 at 15:43 -0400, George N. White III wrote:
> As more systems use IPv6, bad actors will have to collect
> active IPv6 addresses. You may be one of the first to see that
> start.
I have to wonder how that's going to go. With IPv4 most people were
behind NAT (which isn't a fire
On 07/12/2020 03:43, George N. White III wrote:
On Thu, 3 Dec 2020 at 06:00, Ed Greshko mailto:ed.gres...@greshko.com>> wrote:
[...] I can't think of anyone that would go through the
trouble of unpacking pcap output to find IP addresses they could attack.
They either
farm IP addre
On 07/12/2020 03:43, George N. White III wrote:
On Thu, 3 Dec 2020 at 06:00, Ed Greshko mailto:ed.gres...@greshko.com>> wrote:
[...] I can't think of anyone that would go through the
trouble of unpacking pcap output to find IP addresses they could attack.
They either
farm IP addre
On Thu, 3 Dec 2020 at 06:00, Ed Greshko wrote:
> [...] I can't think of anyone that would go through the
> trouble of unpacking pcap output to find IP addresses they could attack.
> They either
> farm IP addresses from emails, dns queries, or just plain find blocks of
> IP addresses
> to attack.
On Sat, 2020-12-05 at 15:46 -0800, Samuel Sieb wrote:
> On 12/5/20 2:53 PM, home user wrote:
> > On 12/4/20 10:45 PM, Ed Greshko wrote:
> > > I pretty much think this topic has been totally addressed and feel
> > > there really is no need to go about
> > > tilting at windmills.
> >
> > Strange ex
On 06/12/2020 12:49, home user wrote:
On 12/5/20 9:24 PM, Samuel Sieb wrote:
and the outgoing is the firewall's rejections
I'm no expert, but I believe the firewall can be set to utterly
ignore things it blocks rather than sending a rejection. Generally
this is more useful for things connecte
On Sat, 2020-12-05 at 21:43 -0500, Tom Horsley wrote:
> I'm no expert, but I believe the firewall can be set to utterly
> ignore things it blocks rather than sending a rejection. Generally
> this is more useful for things connected to the internet at large
> since you'll just get random probes rath
On 12/5/20 9:24 PM, Samuel Sieb wrote:
and the outgoing is the firewall's rejections
I'm no expert, but I believe the firewall can be set to utterly
ignore things it blocks rather than sending a rejection. Generally
this is more useful for things connected to the internet at large
since you'll
On 12/5/20 6:43 PM, Tom Horsley wrote:
On Sat, 5 Dec 2020 19:28:15 -0700
home user wrote:
and the outgoing is the firewall's rejections
I'm no expert, but I believe the firewall can be set to utterly
ignore things it blocks rather than sending a rejection. Generally
this is more useful for th
On 12/5/20 4:46 PM, Samuel Sieb wrote:
Google would have told you right away:
Don Quixote
I haven't read the book, but I'm aware of the expression. Now I'm
curious and will have to ask around to see how generally well-known it is
It's still well-known 400 years after it was published.
__
On 12/5/20 7:43 PM, Tom Horsley wrote:
On Sat, 5 Dec 2020 19:28:15 -0700
home user wrote:
and the outgoing is the firewall's rejections
I'm no expert, but I believe the firewall can be set to utterly
ignore things it blocks rather than sending a rejection. Generally
this is more useful for th
On Sat, 5 Dec 2020 19:28:15 -0700
home user wrote:
> and the outgoing is the firewall's rejections
I'm no expert, but I believe the firewall can be set to utterly
ignore things it blocks rather than sending a rejection. Generally
this is more useful for things connected to the internet at large
s
(part 1)
After the experience of this thread, a tool I'd like to see is something
like netstat or ss or the network activity (bottom panel) of the
ksysguard, except it would show:
* incoming traffic after firewall screening but before the "passed"
traffic reaches the rest of the system, and
*
On 12/5/20 2:53 PM, home user wrote:
On 12/4/20 10:45 PM, Ed Greshko wrote:
I pretty much think this topic has been totally addressed and feel
there really is no need to go about
tilting at windmills.
Strange expression. Haven't heard it before. I'll have to ask those
Dutch organists that
On 06/12/2020 06:53, home user wrote:
The first part was intended to be taken somewhat humorously.
Yes, as was my reply
It wouldn't be a fair contest since Samuel is one time zone away and you're 15
time zones away (if I remember correctly, and neither of you has moved). :)
But, wit
On 12/4/20 10:45 PM, Ed Greshko wrote:
[... snip ...]
So, you can just
sudo systemctl --now disable libvirtd
Without the "--now" you'd have to reboot for this to take effect.
hmmm... Samuel beat you to it. I'll very soon be shutting down for
the night anyway.
I was unaware of bei
On 05/12/2020 12:34, home user wrote:
On 12/4/20 9:08 PM, Ed Greshko wrote:
I've never heard of this. I'm not sure, but this seems like something I don't use, at
least not explicitly. Is this something that I can remove from the system, or at least
turn off (so it won't use CPU), Or is thi
On 12/4/20 9:08 PM, Ed Greshko wrote:
I've never heard of this. I'm not sure, but this seems like something
I don't use, at least not explicitly. Is this something that I can
remove from the system, or at least turn off (so it won't use CPU),
Or is this "under the hood" of things I do use?
On 12/4/20 8:53 PM, Samuel Sieb wrote:
I've never heard of this. I'm not sure, but this seems like something
I don't use, at least not explicitly. Is this something that I can
remove from the system, or at least turn off (so it won't use CPU),
Or is this "under the hood" of things I do use?
On 05/12/2020 11:44, home user wrote:
On 12/3/20 10:57 PM, Ed Greshko wrote:
The virbr0 interface is the interface between your system and any qemu/kvm
Virtual Machines you
deploy. This is an "internal" interface not connected directly to the Internet.
I've never heard of this. I'm not sur
On 12/4/20 7:44 PM, home user wrote:
On 12/3/20 10:57 PM, Ed Greshko wrote:
The virbr0 interface is the interface between your system and any
qemu/kvm Virtual Machines you
deploy. This is an "internal" interface not connected directly to the
Internet.
I've never heard of this. I'm not sure
On 12/3/20 10:57 PM, Ed Greshko wrote:
The virbr0 interface is the interface between your system and any
qemu/kvm Virtual Machines you
deploy. This is an "internal" interface not connected directly to the
Internet.
I've never heard of this. I'm not sure, but this seems like something I
don
On 12/2/20 2:11 PM, Barry Scott wrote:
3. My .bash_profile sources my .bashrc, sets PATH, and launches xeyes.
My .bashrc sources /etc/bashrc, sets PS1 and PATH, and defines aliases.
Set PATH in your .bash_profile not .bashrc.
This is because if you set it in .bashrc you cannot override PATH
On 04/12/2020 12:59, home user wrote:
On 12/3/20 8:10 PM, Ed Greshko wrote:
I believe the firewall on your system is already dropping all incoming
connection requests.
Provide the output of
sudo firewall-cmd --get-active-zones
and then using the result from that command
sudo firewall-c
On 12/3/20 8:10 PM, Ed Greshko wrote:
I believe the firewall on your system is already dropping all incoming
connection requests.
Provide the output of
sudo firewall-cmd --get-active-zones
and then using the result from that command
sudo firewall-cmd --info-zone=whatever-was returned.
This afternoon, I did some more experimenting. As at first, I booted
up. I then logged in, but this time as root. I did *not* launch
Thunderbird (or any other e-mail client) or Firefox (or any other
browser) or anything else that I know uses the internet. So the
workstation should be "quiet
On 12/3/20 5:51 PM, home user wrote:
On 12/3/20 6:35 PM, Samuel Sieb wrote:
On 12/3/20 5:28 PM, home user wrote:
On 12/3/20 5:31 PM, Samuel Sieb wrote:
You will need to add your user to the "wireshark" group:
sudo usermod -a -G wireshark username
Then logout and log back in. Run wireshark.
On 04/12/2020 10:51, home user wrote:
J. Witvliet responded to my original post, but his response showed up in the
list as a new thread. I'm responding here.
(on Dec. 01, 2020 at 02:35am US mountain time, J. Witvliet wrote)
What puzzles me, is that you don’t refer to the firewall.
It’s the fi
J. Witvliet responded to my original post, but his response showed up in the
list as a new thread. I'm responding here.
(on Dec. 01, 2020 at 02:35am US mountain time, J. Witvliet wrote)
> What puzzles me, is that you don’t refer to the firewall.
> It’s the firewall responsibility to block unexpe
On 12/3/20 5:34 PM, home user wrote:
On 12/2/20 9:11 PM, Ed Greshko wrote:
I think this would be easier for you to capture network traffic at
this time..
With a quite system, open a terminal and as root use the following to
capture some packets
tcpdump -c 500 port 22 -w cap.pcap
T
On 12/3/20 6:35 PM, Samuel Sieb wrote:
On 12/3/20 5:28 PM, home user wrote:
On 12/3/20 5:31 PM, Samuel Sieb wrote:
You will need to add your user to the "wireshark" group:
sudo usermod -a -G wireshark username
Then logout and log back in. Run wireshark. There should be a list
of interfaces.
On 12/3/20 5:28 PM, home user wrote:
On 12/3/20 5:31 PM, Samuel Sieb wrote:
You will need to add your user to the "wireshark" group:
sudo usermod -a -G wireshark username
Then logout and log back in. Run wireshark. There should be a list
of interfaces. Double click on your ethernet one.
W
On 12/2/20 9:11 PM, Ed Greshko wrote:
I think this would be easier for you to capture network traffic at this
time..
With a quite system, open a terminal and as root use the following to
capture some packets
tcpdump -c 500 port 22 -w cap.pcap
This will capture 500 packets and then
On 12/3/20 5:31 PM, Samuel Sieb wrote:
You will need to add your user to the "wireshark" group:
sudo usermod -a -G wireshark username
Then logout and log back in. Run wireshark. There should be a list of
interfaces. Double click on your ethernet one.
When I "opened" the cap.pcap that Ed se
On 11/30/20 3:47 PM, home user wrote:
I've installed wireshark. The man page is thousands of lines long. Is
there a good beginner-level tutorial for that?!
You will need to add your user to the "wireshark" group:
sudo usermod -a -G wireshark username
Then logout and log back in. Run wireshar
On 12/3/20 2:01 PM, Ed Greshko wrote:
On 04/12/2020 05:04, Samuel Sieb wrote:
Is your computer's IP address in the 192.168.* or 10.* ranges? If
not, then you're directly connected. Since you mentioned seeing login
attempts before, you most likely are.
You forgot the less common 172.16.0.0
On 12/3/20 4:01 PM, home user wrote:
In gnome, I click the little network? symbol in the upper right corner of the
display, just left of the speaker symbol. In the little box that comes up,
from top to bottom, there is
* "Wired Settings".
I pick "Wired Settings". Here are the results:
"https:
In gnome, I click the little network? symbol in the upper right corner of the
display, just left of the speaker symbol. In the little box that comes up,
from top to bottom, there is
* a volume slider,
* "Wired Connected >",
* "Settings >", and
* "Power Off / Log Out >".
I click the "Wired Connec
> On 2020-12-03 19:40, home user wrote:
>
>
> Yellow? Is that safe? (Joke.)
I could use a good laugh these days. I 'm missing the joke. Please explain it.
> Sometimes what users think is just a "modem" also contains a small
> router
> and enough of a firewall to do NAT. Sometimes (as with
On 2020-12-03 19:40, home user wrote:
I was asked about this system.
* comcast(my ISP) connected via metal wire cable to Arris phone modem
connected via ethernet cable (yellow) to the workstation tower port.
Yellow? Is that safe? (Joke.)
Sometimes what users think is just a "modem" also con
On 04/12/2020 05:04, Samuel Sieb wrote:
Is your computer's IP address in the 192.168.* or 10.* ranges? If not, then you're directly connected. Since you mentioned seeing login attempts before, you most likely are.
You forgot the less common 172.16.0.0 – 172.31.255.255 range.
---
The key to g
On 12/3/20 11:40 AM, home user wrote:
I did not fully understand them, but I got the sense that I should get help and
not try to tackle this on my own. Finding and removing cryptominers can be
very difficult.
It's also extremely unlikely that you have something like that.
I was asked about
On 12/3/20 1:11 AM, Tim via users wrote:
Tim:
All normal stuff, although they're listening to any address, rather
than only listening to local addresses. That could be tightened up
for some things, at least. I see no reason for CUPS to listen
outside of your LAN, for instance.
Samuel Sieb:
My posts to this list were apparently not reaching the list for a couple of
days. This was fedora infrastructure issue 9509. It's fixed. Since the fix,
I've been buried in personal business. I now have some time to get back to
this problem.
Prior to opening this thread, I did try digging in
On 03/12/2020 12:16, Samuel Sieb wrote:
Also, the capture file could contain some information that shouldn't be
publicly shared.
OK Let me try to make it "easier" for the OP to use this particular "process of
elimination".
Meaning, eliminate brute force ssh attacks as the source of "myst
On 03/12/2020 12:16, Samuel Sieb wrote:
Also, the capture file could contain some information that shouldn't be
publicly shared.
OK Let me try to make it "easier" for the OP to use this particular "process of
elimination".
Meaning, eliminate brute force ssh attacks as the source of "myst
On 03/12/2020 17:14, Tim via users wrote:
On Thu, 2020-12-03 at 12:53 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote:
I suppose if one is paranoid about posting their ip addresses they
may be concerned.
I tend to avoid that, because it just invites some people to have a go.
However, in most posts to a mailing list yo
On Thu, 2020-12-03 at 12:53 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote:
> I suppose if one is paranoid about posting their ip addresses they
> may be concerned.
I tend to avoid that, because it just invites some people to have a go.
However, in most posts to a mailing list your IP is in the mail
headers.
I remember
Tim:
>> All normal stuff, although they're listening to any address, rather
>> than only listening to local addresses. That could be tightened up
>> for some things, at least. I see no reason for CUPS to listen
>> outside of your LAN, for instance.
Samuel Sieb:
> I assume you're referring to the
On Thu, 2020-12-03 at 08:59 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote:
> [egreshko@meimei etc]$ host no-mans-land.m247.com
> Host no-mans-land.m247.com not found: 3(NXDOMAIN)
>
> So, what is the real IP address of that hostname?
m247.com comes up with a general cloud service website, perhaps the no-
mans-land pref
On 03/12/2020 12:16, Samuel Sieb wrote:
On 12/2/20 8:11 PM, Ed Greshko wrote:
On 03/12/2020 00:09, home user wrote:
(I sent this to the list three times in the past two days; it apparently never
arrived, and it did not bounce.)
I rebooted, and did a few netstat's and an iftop while the workst
On 12/2/20 8:11 PM, Ed Greshko wrote:
On 03/12/2020 00:09, home user wrote:
(I sent this to the list three times in the past two days; it
apparently never arrived, and it did not bounce.)
I rebooted, and did a few netstat's and an iftop while the workstation
was "quiet". I pasted output from
On 03/12/2020 00:09, home user wrote:
(I sent this to the list three times in the past two days; it apparently never
arrived, and it did not bounce.)
I rebooted, and did a few netstat's and an iftop while the workstation was
"quiet". I pasted output from 2 netstat runs into a text file.
I t
On 03/12/2020 00:02, home user wrote:
(I sent this to the list three times in the past two days; it apparently never
arrived, and it did not bounce.)
I rebooted, and did a few netstat's and an iftop while the workstation was
"quiet". I pasted output from 2 netstat runs into a text file.
I pa
On 12/2/20 3:06 PM, Tim via users wrote:
All normal stuff, although they're listening to any address, rather
than only listening to local addresses. That could be tightened up for
some things, at least. I see no reason for CUPS to listen outside of
your LAN, for instance.
I assume you're refe
On Wed, 2020-12-02 at 16:09 +, home user wrote:
> --- begin text file ---
> Active Internet connections (servers and established)
> Proto Recv-Q Send-Q Local Address Foreign Address State
> User Inode PID/Program name
> tcp0
> On 30 Nov 2020, at 21:03, Ed Greshko wrote:
>
> On 01/12/2020 04:57, home user wrote:
>> How do I check that? And how do I change it? By the way, I power down
>> every night; and power up every morning.
>
> Along with watching the output of wireshark, you should run "netstat -atuevp"
> a
> On 30 Nov 2020, at 17:57, home user wrote:
>
> 3. My .bash_profile sources my .bashrc, sets PATH, and launches xeyes. My
> .bashrc sources /etc/bashrc, sets PS1 and PATH, and defines aliases.
Set PATH in your .bash_profile not .bashrc.
This is because if you set it in .bashrc you cannot o
A non expert response.
On Wed, 02 Dec 2020 16:09:16 -
"home user" wrote:
> A few years ago, I saw in the system journal numerous log-in attempts
> by outsiders from all over the world, and opened a thread about that.
> Now such attempts are blocked by the firewall. If an outsider tries
> t
(I sent this to the list three times in the past two days; it apparently never
arrived, and it did not bounce.)
I rebooted, and did a few netstat's and an iftop while the workstation was
"quiet". I pasted output from 2 netstat runs into a text file.
I paused the iftop display many times to gra
(I sent this to the list three times in the past two days; it apparently
never arrived, and it did not bounce.)
I rebooted, and did a few netstat's and an iftop while the workstation
was "quiet". I pasted output from 2 netstat runs into a text file.
I paused the iftop display many times to g
On 12/1/20 1:18 AM, home user wrote:
(on Mon, 2020-11-30 at 23:56 +, Ed wrote)
> I thought you said your system was "quiet"?
>
> For your "network activity" issue the lines of interest are those
> which include "ESTABLISHED" as the state.
>
> It shows both "thunderbird" and "firefox" ar
From: "home user" mailto:mattis...@comcast.net>>
Date: Monday, 30 November 2020 at 18:57:40
To: "users@lists.fedoraproject.org"
mailto:users@lists.fedoraproject.org>>
Subject: mysterious/suspicious internet activity.
Fedora-32 home workstation; gnome.
On 01/12/2020 08:18, home user wrote:
(on Mon, 2020-11-30 at 23:56 +, Ed wrote)
> I thought you said your system was "quiet"?
>
> For your "network activity" issue the lines of interest are those
> which include "ESTABLISHED" as the state.
>
> It shows both "thunderbird" and "firefox" are bot
On 01/12/2020 08:18, home user wrote:
(on Mon, 2020-11-30 at 23:56 +, Ed wrote)
> I thought you said your system was "quiet"?
>
> For your "network activity" issue the lines of interest are those
> which include "ESTABLISHED" as the state.
>
> It shows both "thunderbird" and "firefox" are bot
(on Mon, 2020-11-30 at 23:56 +, Ed wrote)
> I thought you said your system was "quiet"?
>
> For your "network activity" issue the lines of interest are those
> which include "ESTABLISHED" as the state.
>
> It shows both "thunderbird" and "firefox" are both running and connected
> to hosts. So
On 01/12/2020 07:47, home user wrote:
(on Mon, 2020-11-30 at 18:37 +, Tim wrote)
> ...you really want to do something like "netstat -atuevp" to see what, where,
> and who is involved in network traffic.
(on Mon, 2020-11-30 at 21:03 +, Ed Greshko wrote)
> Along with watching the output of
(on Mon, 2020-11-30 at 18:37 +, jtj wrote)
>AKAIK, Fedora checks for updates at intervals to notify them
> via dnfdragora. May be that.
(I replied to this hours ago, but I don't see my reply in the thread.
Trying again.)
A few years ago, with the help of members of this list, I turned off
(on Mon, 2020-11-30 at 18:37 +, Tim wrote)
> ...you really want to do something like "netstat -atuevp" to see
what, where,
> and who is involved in network traffic.
(on Mon, 2020-11-30 at 21:03 +, Ed Greshko wrote)
> Along with watching the output of wireshark, you should run "netstat
On 01/12/2020 04:57, home user wrote:
How do I check that? And how do I change it? By the way, I power down every
night; and power up every morning.
Along with watching the output of wireshark, you should run "netstat -atuevp"
and see what connections
are "established".
---
The key to gett
On Mon, 30 Nov 2020 20:57:13 -
"home user" wrote:
> So how do I get network traffic data for a full minute? That seems
> like the best option to either establish that something bad is going
> on, or that Joe Wulf is correct.
You can observe your network connections by running iftop as root.
On 11/30/20 12:57 PM, home user wrote:
So how do I get network traffic data for a full minute? That seems like the
best option to either establish that something bad is going on, or that Joe
Wulf is correct.
Install wireshark. That will let you monitor all the traffic and see
what's happen
> On Mon, 2020-11-30 at 17:57 +, home user wrote:
>
> Only one of your image links loaded for me, the browser just spent ages
> with the spinning circle. This one worked:
>
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/1AyZDRvcKYHYypNSU6AF9Fh34rh_l3q2J/view
>
Ah-ha! So that's it. The villain is googl
> The pictures you shared look to me like very low amounts of data (2-6
> kilobytes).This is
> going to be the standard networking which goes on with linux all the
> time.System and
> network-based services are reaching out to the router (gateway)periodically
> to verify
> connectivity and the
On Mon, 2020-11-30 at 17:57 +, home user wrote:
> In ksysguard, I've been noticing internet activity that I can't
> explain. This has been going on for weeks, and it's making me
> uncomfortable.
Only one of your image links loaded for me, the browser just spent ages
with the spinning circle.
El 30/11/20 a las 18:57, home user escribió:
Fedora-32 home workstation; gnome.
In ksysguard, I've been noticing internet activity that I can't explain. This
has been going on for weeks, and it's making me uncomfortable.
What I do:
1. After the system has been powered down overnight, I boot i
Bill,
The pictures you shared look to me like very low amounts of data (2-6
kilobytes).This is going to be the standard networking which goes on with linux
all the time.System and network-based services are reaching out to the router
(gateway)periodically to verify connectivity and the like.
I
Fedora-32 home workstation; gnome.
In ksysguard, I've been noticing internet activity that I can't explain. This
has been going on for weeks, and it's making me uncomfortable.
What I do:
1. After the system has been powered down overnight, I boot it up.
2. I sign in to a user account.
3. My .ba
89 matches
Mail list logo
