wademealing

>> My advice would be that if you're consistently getting negative feedback about personality traits from others, take it seriously.

This is bland and simple advice at best, that only serves the 'groups' best interest, not the individual.

Half the people you meet are below average intelligence, I'd strongly advise not listening to at least half of what people have to say. The other half could also be giving self-serving advice that isn't in your best interest.

My advice is to ignore everyone.

Ive recently learned that the 'write protection' of sd is an honor system.

Historical evidence shows this to be factual.

I feel like writing a 'goodbye goodbyes' medium piece which talks about never listening to a 'goodbye' article again.

I have a feeling that its a CPU designed with side-channel attacks in mind. Could be Intel, could be ARM.

I think that IBM know if they get their hands dirty in Red Hat, they wont have much ROI from their investment.

This reminds me of the same discussion back in the late 90's

I think thats changing with CentOS stream ( see https://developers.redhat.com/blog/2019/09/24/changes-to-cen... ) this probably means that CentOS will have a reduced ramp up time for releases.

Disclaimer: I work at Red Hat.

I'd rather use gimp than photoshop.

Photoshop, ergg.. what a confusing tool!, who would use a 'cloud service' for your important data.. lol.

No, its the fact that you need to re-upload that app every 7 days..

> If you introduce a technology into the world, you have to consider the possibilities every type of person

You can't.. the human mind simply can't understand every type of person or even 90% of every type of person. If this is a requirement for advancement nothing would ever get done due to the complexity of this part of the problem alone.

> with every possible aim

Again, we are limited beings this is not possible.

> having control of that technology. Not doing this is simply not scientific.

I'm going to disagree with your use of the term 'scientific in this case. The creation and use cases are entirely different steps in development.

The onus is not on the creator but the user. This is basis for modern law in the society we live in, we collectively choose to put this on the ' scientific community ' development will happen elsewhere and the moral civilization while nicer will remain in the stone age where it belongs.

There is almost 0% reason why this can't be done already.

Is this difficult to believe, do you delete users hundreds of times a day ?

I'd be very interested in if you find something specific. Do you have any details regarding the AWS contacts because i'd like to see if i can generalize it for the RHEL6 case and maybe feed it back into engineering.

wmealing @ redhat dawt com.

I believe that the blame here is mostly misattributed.

Caching (a good thing) and also the remote sites being bloated. I'm not sure if or should the browser be fixing that ?

I might be missing the point here, but larger binaries are not always slower.

I believe that this (SWAPGS) vector is impractical but previous spectre proof of concepts exists if you look hard enough.

I agree its unfair.

Microsoft also played ball with Linux vendors alerting them to this vector. This allowed them to get the swapGS fixes tested and sane.

This interaction with the opensource community has significantly increased my respect for Microsoft.

I will wear my vendor hat here for a moment,

AC not about the attacker, but the configuration of the component being assessed.

I wrote to NIST/NVD tis morning about the CVSS score (12+ hours ago now) they haven't got back to me.

You dont, usually.. I keep one for the code and the other for the browser/private stuff.

You can setup a 'scene' in obs to switch to the other window if you need to, but keeping it focused on your editor/work display really helps those private moments slip to the stream less often.

and Generic Segment offloading.

Thanks for the report, getting our team to fix that.

Similar concept, different operating system.

Disclaimer: I worked on initial Red Hat article linked above.

In my personal AWS instance from the last few days less than half a percent of the traffic had hit the firewall rule to log the error.

Most of that traffic seemed to come from the China, this was possibly port probing / portscans or really old hardware accessing my the server.

I would say that the iptables rule is a 'better' solution than dropping sack as you may find you use significantly more CPU/bandwidth when dealing with retransmits when not using selective acknowledgements.