Molle Bestefich wrote:
>
> Point taken.
> I like KDE better than Gnome, so Ubuntu is a bad fit.
> And the 5.04 installation CD completely hung my workstation when I
> tried it.
>
Kubuntu is the same distro just using KDE as the default desktop, and
the latest version of Ubuntu/Kubuntu, Dapper, has
Michael Stefaniuc wrote:
> Molle Bestefich wrote:
> > Stefan Dösinger wrote:
> >
> >> Disabling the Z:\ drive won't help security
> >
> >
> > in THEORY...
> >
> >> because windows applications can still do Linux syscalls
> >> (int 0x80) which they can use do do anything native
> >> apps do, l
On 7/25/06, Molle Bestefich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
(Point taken about the list noise, btw. I'm trying to be polite andanswer people's questions, and at the same time not expand the subjectsince I know we're deeply off-topic by now. I do feel bad about that,but there's no way right now to both
Hi,
> > What distro do you run?
>
> Gentoo.
I am a Gentoo user too, and I never had problems with running as non-root. the
system starts up kdm at startup and I can log in there as a normal user which
I use for everyday work, wine development, running windows apps and
everything else. I never ha
Dimi Paun wrote:
Fixing your X installation would do you a lot more good.
Not sure how much it would help though - I'm secretly also slightly
hateful towards the concept of configuring and switching between two
user accounts just to do daily work. It seems such a conceptually
broken solution (
No trolling on the wine-devel mailing list please. I got in deep shit
for that, but you are a rather respected member of the Wine community,
and to lose that respect over a simple flame would be ironic.
And it seems the other guy is trolling himself, but did you not see the
sign? "Do not feed
"n0dalus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I mean, is there a way for wine to stop applications it runs from
making those syscalls while still being able to make them itself?
No, and the reason "why" already has been pronounced.
--
Dmitry.
Molle Bestefich wrote:
>
>
> (It's probably something really simple too, I just don't have the
> time, energy nor do I even want to figure out how this crap works -
> for the time being, I'm not into X hacking, so for me it's a tool that
> should "just work", and if it doesn't, the worst I'm going
On 7/24/06, Vitaliy Margolen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Or better then that go and buy xbox. It can play games too.Vitaliy.I wouldnt advise that, because an xbox can run linux too, and since the original xbox runs on PC hardware, i wouldbt be at all surprised to see someone try to get wine working
Monday, July 24, 2006, 10:00:44 AM, Molle Bestefich wrote:
> Christoph Frick wrote:
>> you complain about security in wine and run it as root? even if i have
>> the strongest doubts, that there is need for running wine as root
> Hehe.
> It won't work as non-root, and I could waste days finding out
On 7/25/06, Dmitry Timoshkov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Disabling the Z:\ drive won't help security because windows applications can
> > still do Linux syscalls (int 0x80) which they can use do do anything native
> > apps do, like accessing files outside wine drive mappings.
>
> Is there a wa
"n0dalus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 7/24/06, Stefan Dösinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Disabling the Z:\ drive won't help security because windows applications can
> still do Linux syscalls (int 0x80) which they can use do do anything native
> apps do, like accessing files outside wine dr
On 7/24/06, Stefan Dösinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Disabling the Z:\ drive won't help security because windows applications can
still do Linux syscalls (int 0x80) which they can use do do anything native
apps do, like accessing files outside wine drive mappings.
Is there a way to disable th
On Monday 24 July 2006 13:25, Molle Bestefich wrote:
> Kuba Ober wrote:
> > ?! You're saying that you can't get wine to work for you as non-root?
> > Do other X applications work for you as non-root?
>
> Can't remember, but my gut feeling is 'no'.
Then it's really off-topic then. If you'd be willi
Molle Bestefich wrote:
> >
> > you complain about security in wine and run it as root? even if i have
> > the strongest doubts, that there is need for running wine as root
> It won't work as non-root,
Wine works always as non-root.
> and I could waste days finding out
> whatever's wrong with my
Kuba Ober wrote:
?! You're saying that you can't get wine to work for you as non-root?
Do other X applications work for you as non-root?
Can't remember, but my gut feeling is 'no'.
(It's probably something really simple too, I just don't have the
time, energy nor do I even want to figure out h
> > That's plain wrong. I guess Wine needs a patch to make it stop working
> > as uid 0 ...
>
> Some interesting "security features" could be:
[. . .]
Which all leads to nothing, as any windows application can test for and then
invoke linux (or freebsd, or whatever) syscalls directly without wine
> > you complain about security in wine and run it as root? even if i have
> > the strongest doubts, that there is need for running wine as root
> It won't work as non-root, and I could waste days finding out
> whatever's wrong with my X configuration (which is the default as it
> comes with Gent
Christoph Frick wrote:
Molle Bestefich wrote:
> But in PRACTICE, it would help a lot to hinder total system
> destruction once viruses start running correctly on Wine.
> (Especially for users like me, who always runs Wine as the root user
> ;-).)
you complain about security in wine and run it as
Augusto Arcoverde da Rocha wrote:
Some interesting "security features" could be:
* Built-in option to execute Wine in a jail, like using chroot
command, over a WINEPREFIX;
* Block root or a warning when doing this as an oficial option at
execution or compilation time;
* A interative warning or
On 7/24/06, Michael Stefaniuc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[cut]
That's plain wrong. I guess Wine needs a patch to make it stop working
as uid 0 ...
Some interesting "security features" could be:
* Built-in option to execute Wine in a jail, like using chroot
command, over a WINEPREFIX;
* Block ro
Molle Bestefich wrote:
> Stefan Dösinger wrote:
>
>> Disabling the Z:\ drive won't help security
>
>
> in THEORY...
>
>> because windows applications can still do Linux syscalls
>> (int 0x80) which they can use do do anything native
>> apps do, like accessing files outside wine drive mappings.
On Mon, Jul 24, 2006 at 02:49:57PM +0200, Molle Bestefich wrote:
> But in PRACTICE, it would help a lot to hinder total system
> destruction once viruses start running correctly on Wine.
> (Especially for users like me, who always runs Wine as the root user
> ;-).)
you complain about security in
Stefan Dösinger wrote:
Disabling the Z:\ drive won't help security
in THEORY...
because windows applications can still do Linux syscalls
(int 0x80) which they can use do do anything native
apps do, like accessing files outside wine drive mappings.
But in PRACTICE, it would help a lot to hin
On Mon, Jul 24, 2006 at 08:58:05PM +1000, Jeff Latimer wrote:
> Marcus Meissner wrote:
>
> >>
> >>as we've heard from our Austrian colleague, this is not improving sec
> >>(which was a freshening shock for me).
> >>
> >
> >Since the symlink is in a directory controlled by the user, the user
> >s
Marcus Meissner wrote:
as we've heard from our Austrian colleague, this is not improving sec (which was a freshening shock for me).
Since the symlink is in a directory controlled by the user, the user
should be able to remove it. If not, something is broken.
ls -la ~/.wine
Le lundi 24 juillet 2006 à 11:25 +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit :
> Hi Marcus,
>
> you wrote:
>
> > > (Maybe it's possible just to leave out the Z: mapping?)
> >
> > rm ~/.wine/dosdevices/z:
> >
> > You can also adjust the "wineprefixcreate" script not to create it anymore.
>
> as we've hea
On Mon, Jul 24, 2006 at 11:25:17AM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hi Marcus,
>
> you wrote:
>
> > > (Maybe it's possible just to leave out the Z: mapping?)
> >
> > rm ~/.wine/dosdevices/z:
> >
> > You can also adjust the "wineprefixcreate" script not to create it anymore.
>
> as we've hear
Hi Marcus,
you wrote:
> > (Maybe it's possible just to leave out the Z: mapping?)
>
> rm ~/.wine/dosdevices/z:
>
> You can also adjust the "wineprefixcreate" script not to create it anymore.
as we've heard from our Austrian colleague, this is not improving sec (which
was a freshening shock f
On Sun, Jul 23, 2006 at 04:28:09PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Dear friends and developers of WINE,
>
> I've been using your application now for some time, and it works quite well
> yet. However, I found the mapping of Drive Z: to root, which seems a bit
> strange to me. I've also read som
Am Sonntag 23 Juli 2006 17:04 schrieb Dan Kegel:
> On 7/23/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > It would help a lot if WINE would do a more secure installation by
> > default, but this is only my 2p.
> >
> > (Maybe it's possible just to leave out the Z: mapping?)
>
> My 2 cents:
> I
On 7/23/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It would help a lot if WINE would do a more secure installation by default, but
this is only my 2p.
(Maybe it's possible just to leave out the Z: mapping?)
My 2 cents:
It's an ease-of-use thing. Yes, we should leave out the Z:
mapping,
Dear friends and developers of WINE,
I've been using your application now for some time, and it works quite well
yet. However, I found the mapping of Drive Z: to root, which seems a bit
strange to me. I've also read some of your discussion on this topic, too.
Personally, I'd consider this a may
33 matches
Mail list logo
