On Mon, 2011-12-05 at 10:05 -0500, Rilindo Foster wrote:
> . Which version of grub are you running and from which distro?
Distro = C 5.7
Regrettably the command:
grub --version
yields:-
grub (GNU GRUB 0.97)
But this is insufficient information because it d
On 12/05/2011 07:00 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
>> I thought CentOS6 didn't come with a non-PAE kernel, more specifically,
>> the standard 32bit kernel requires PAE even if it doesnt have PAE in its
>> name.
>
> I hadn't followed that development. *sigh*
>>
I believe that is true of CentOS-5 as w
On Mon, 2011-12-05 at 10:05 -0500, Rilindo Foster wrote:
> . Which version of grub are you running and from which distro?
Distro = C 5.7
Regrettably the command:
grub --version
yields:-
grub (GNU GRUB 0.97)
But this is insufficient information because it do
Vreme: 12/06/2011 01:42 PM, Always Learning piše:
> On Mon, 2011-12-05 at 10:05 -0500, Rilindo Foster wrote:
>> . Which version of grub are you running and from which distro?
>
> Distro = C 5.7
>
> Regrettably the command:
>
> grub --version
>
> yields:-
>
> grub (GNU
On Monday, December 05, 2011 06:58:53 PM Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
> I plan on releasing unofficial CentOS Desktop oriented LiveDVD with all
> the goodies like newest Firefox and ElRepo kernel modules for NIC's and
> wireless, and "upgrade" repository with missing or newer packages of
> Desktop
As much as I hate to be the bearer of news, I saw over 400 updates this morning
on my upstream 6.1 box checking the upstream website, yeah, EL6.2 is out,
at least for updates. I didn't see ISO's in my subscribed channel yet, though.
I figured someone would notice soon enough.
So before any
2011/12/6 Lamar Owen :
> As much as I hate to be the bearer of news, I saw over 400 updates this
> morning on my upstream 6.1 box checking the upstream website, yeah, EL6.2
> is out, at least for updates. I didn't see ISO's in my subscribed channel
> yet, though.
access.redhat.com shows al
Vreme: 12/06/2011 03:58 PM, Lamar Owen piše:
> On Monday, December 05, 2011 06:58:53 PM Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
>> I plan on releasing unofficial CentOS Desktop oriented LiveDVD with all
>> the goodies like newest Firefox and ElRepo kernel modules for NIC's and
>> wireless, and "upgrade" reposit
On 6 December 2011 15:40, Eero Volotinen wrote:
> 2011/12/6 Lamar Owen :
>> As much as I hate to be the bearer of news, I saw over 400 updates this
>> morning on my upstream 6.1 box checking the upstream website, yeah,
>> EL6.2 is out, at least for updates. I didn't see ISO's in my subscrib
On 12/06/2011 08:08 AM, Lamar Owen wrote:
> As much as I hate to be the bearer of news, I saw over 400 updates this
> morning on my upstream 6.1 box checking the upstream website, yeah, EL6.2
> is out, at least for updates. I didn't see ISO's in my subscribed channel
> yet, though.
>
> I fi
On 05.12.2011 22:49, Fajar Priyanto wrote:
[...]
>>
>> Is there something I can do to prevent this ? Is there a gui interface
>> to enable NAT over a VPN connection that cooperates with
>> system-config-network ?
>>
> You mean system-config-securitylevel?
> It's pretty useless. Pls take a look at F
Vreme: 12/06/2011 06:06 PM, Timothy Madden piše:
> On 05.12.2011 22:49, Fajar Priyanto wrote:
> [...]
>>>
>>> Is there something I can do to prevent this ? Is there a gui interface
>>> to enable NAT over a VPN connection that cooperates with
>>> system-config-network ?
>>>
>> You mean system-config
This is probably something any SA should know... but I don't!
On CentOS 5 I can see what a process's current soft and hard
limits are; /proc//limits
However this isn't in the C4 kernel. Is there any easy way of determining
what the process rlimit values are?
% uname -a ; cat /etc/redhat-release
On Tue, Dec 06, 2011 at 01:08:32PM -0500, Stephen Harris wrote:
> This is probably something any SA should know... but I don't!
>
...
>
> % uname -a ; cat /etc/redhat-release
> Linux c4 2.6.20.7 #3 Sun May 2 16:30:15 EDT 2010 i686 i686 i386 GNU/Linux
> CentOS release 4.8 (Final)
>
> (yes, I know
We're just using Linux software RAID for the first time - RAID1, and the
other day, a drive failed. We have a clone machine to play with, so it's
not that critical, but
I partitioned a replacement drive. On the clone, I marked the RAID
partitions on /dev/sda failed, and remove, and pulled the
On Tue, Dec 06, 2011 at 07:25:26PM +0100, Tru Huynh wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 06, 2011 at 01:08:32PM -0500, Stephen Harris wrote:
> > % uname -a ; cat /etc/redhat-release
> > Linux c4 2.6.20.7 #3 Sun May 2 16:30:15 EDT 2010 i686 i686 i386 GNU/Linux
> > CentOS release 4.8 (Final)
> >
> > (yes, I know th
On Tuesday, December 06, 2011 10:40:30 AM Eero Volotinen wrote:
> 2011/12/6 Lamar Owen :
> > As much as I hate to be the bearer of news, I saw over 400 updates this
> > morning on my upstream 6.1 box checking the upstream website, yeah,
> > EL6.2 is out, at least for updates. I didn't see IS
Am 06.12.2011 19:28, schrieb m.r...@5-cent.us:
> We're just using Linux software RAID for the first time - RAID1, and the
> other day, a drive failed. We have a clone machine to play with, so it's
> not that critical, but
>
> I partitioned a replacement drive. On the clone, I marked the RAID
On 12/06/2011 09:08 AM, Lamar Owen wrote:
> As much as I hate to be the bearer of news, I saw over 400 updates this
> morning on my upstream 6.1 box checking the upstream website, yeah, EL6.2
> is out, at least for updates. I didn't see ISO's in my subscribed channel
> yet, though.
>
> I f
On Mon, 05 Dec 2011 19:24:29 +0100, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
[]
> You are special case user, not many even heard of those apps, let alone
> use them.
Probably true, for now. But the Baby Boomers have been following
me at a remove of two to five years since they were born; y'
Reindl Harald wrote:
>
>
> Am 06.12.2011 19:28, schrieb m.r...@5-cent.us:
>> We're just using Linux software RAID for the first time - RAID1, and the
>> other day, a drive failed. We have a clone machine to play with, so it's
>> not that critical, but
>>
>> I partitioned a replacement drive. On
On Tue, 2011-12-06 at 13:12 -0600, Johnny Hughes wrote:
> On 12/06/2011 09:08 AM, Lamar Owen wrote:
> > As much as I hate to be the bearer of news, I saw over 400 updates this
> > morning on my upstream 6.1 box checking the upstream website, yeah,
> > EL6.2 is out, at least for updates. I di
On Tuesday, December 06, 2011 02:21:09 PM m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
> Reindl Harald wrote:
> > the device name is totally uninteresting, the IDs are
> > mdadm /dev/mdx --add /dev/sdex
> No, it's not uninteresting. I can't be sure that when it reboots, it won't
> come back as /dev/sda.
The RAIDsets
On Tuesday, December 06, 2011 02:12:04 PM Johnny Hughes wrote:
> You should see 6.2 significantly faster than 6.1 ... especially the CR rpms.
Thanks for the info, Johnny. Looking forward to it.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.cent
Lamar Owen wrote:
> On Tuesday, December 06, 2011 02:21:09 PM m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
>> Reindl Harald wrote:
>> > the device name is totally uninteresting, the IDs are
>> > mdadm /dev/mdx --add /dev/sdex
>
>> No, it's not uninteresting. I can't be sure that when it reboots, it
>> won't come back a
Am 06.12.2011 20:21, schrieb m.r...@5-cent.us:
> Reindl Harald wrote:
>>
>>
>> Am 06.12.2011 19:28, schrieb m.r...@5-cent.us:
>>> We're just using Linux software RAID for the first time - RAID1, and the
>>> other day, a drive failed. We have a clone machine to play with, so it's
>>> not that crit
On 12/06/2011 07:24 PM, Louis Lagendijk wrote:
> I am still not able to install ipa-server due to 2 missing packages:
> pki-ca and pki-silent. Will they be in the 6.1 release, please, pretty
> please?
>
these will be there in the next day or so, the 6.1 media load is going
to create a bit of turb
On Tue, 2011-12-06 at 19:51 +, Karanbir Singh wrote:
> On 12/06/2011 07:24 PM, Louis Lagendijk wrote:
> > I am still not able to install ipa-server due to 2 missing packages:
> > pki-ca and pki-silent. Will they be in the 6.1 release, please, pretty
> > please?
> >
>
> these will be there in
On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 12:40 PM, Johnny Hughes wrote:
> On 11/30/2011 12:05 PM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
>> There's an article on slashdot about the Duqu team wiping all their
>> intermediary c&c servers on 20 Oct. Interestingly, the report says that
>> they were all (?) not only linux, but CentOS
On Tuesday, December 06, 2011 02:46:24 PM m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
> Booting purposes is the point: /dev/md0 is /boot. And as the slot's ATA0,
> it should come up as sda. You mention getting the bootloader sectors over
> - do you mean, after it's rebuilt and active, to then rerun grub-install?
Eith
i have tried a lot but not able to get wireless ...i am
using dell 1470 14-r
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
On 12/06/2011 08:09 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
> Any luck on the specific attack path yet? The linked article
> suggests Centos up to 5.5 was vulnerable.
We dont have access to the actual machines that were broken into - so
pretty much everything is second hand info.
But based on what we know and
On Tuesday, December 06, 2011 03:09:42 PM Lamar Owen wrote:
> I've seen that happen before. It was a tad disconcerting at first, but, yes,
> in the case I saw it a reboot made it back to sda.
Oh, and /dev/sda is not necessarily the BIOS boot device, by the way. For
instance, on my upstream EL
Lamar Owen wrote:
> On Tuesday, December 06, 2011 02:46:24 PM m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
>> Booting purposes is the point: /dev/md0 is /boot. And as the slot's
>> ATA0, it should come up as sda. You mention getting the bootloader
>> sectors over - do you mean, after it's rebuilt and active, to then re
Lamar Owen wrote:
> On Tuesday, December 06, 2011 03:09:42 PM Lamar Owen wrote:
>> I've seen that happen before. It was a tad disconcerting at first, but,
>> yes, in the case I saw it a reboot made it back to sda.
>
> Oh, and /dev/sda is not necessarily the BIOS boot device, by the way. For
> ins
On 12/06/11 12:12 PM, Gagan Chohan wrote:
> i have tried a lot but not able to get wireless ...i am
> using dell 1470 14-r
according to Dell's site, the Inspiron 14R is a N4010 or N4110, and the
1470 is a 14Z
the 14Z (1470) can use any of...
* Dell™ Wireless 365 Bluetoot
Lamar Owen wrote:
> On Tuesday, December 06, 2011 03:09:42 PM Lamar Owen wrote:
>> I've seen that happen before. It was a tad disconcerting at first, but,
>> yes, in the case I saw it a reboot made it back to sda.
>
Right, forgot to mention: I need to partition the drive before I use it,
anyway, a
On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 12:28 PM, wrote:
> We're just using Linux software RAID for the first time - RAID1, and the
> other day, a drive failed. We have a clone machine to play with, so it's
> not that critical, but
>
> I partitioned a replacement drive. On the clone, I marked the RAID
> parti
On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 1:46 PM, wrote:
>
> Booting purposes is the point: /dev/md0 is /boot. And as the slot's ATA0,
> it should come up as sda. You mention getting the bootloader sectors over
> - do you mean, after it's rebuilt and active, to then rerun grub-install?
> Remember, the drive that's
On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 2:18 PM, Karanbir Singh wrote:
> On 12/06/2011 08:09 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
>> Any luck on the specific attack path yet? The linked article
>> suggests Centos up to 5.5 was vulnerable.
>
> We dont have access to the actual machines that were broken into - so
> pretty muc
Les Mikesell wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 1:46 PM, wrote:
>>
>> Booting purposes is the point: /dev/md0 is /boot. And as the slot's
>> ATA0, it should come up as sda. You mention getting the bootloader
>> sectors over - do you mean, after it's rebuilt and active, to then
>> rerun grub-install?
Les Mikesell wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 2:18 PM, Karanbir Singh
> wrote:
>> On 12/06/2011 08:09 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
>>> Any luck on the specific attack path yet? The linked article
>>> suggests Centos up to 5.5 was vulnerable.
>>
>> We dont have access to the actual machines that were
On Tuesday, December 06, 2011 03:39:06 PM m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
> Ack! So I actually need to run grub-install, and do it for both; didn't
> know that (always had /boot as a plain vanilla primary partition)?!
If /dev/sdb doesn't have the stage1.5 in the first 60 or so sectors after the
MBR (whic
On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 2:40 PM, wrote:
> >>
>>> But based on what we know and what we have been told and what we have
>>> worked out ourselves as well, its almost certainly bruteforced ssh
>>> passwords.
>>
>> So, coincidence that they were CentOS, and pre-5.6? Did they have
>> admins in common
On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 2:39 PM, wrote:
>
>> Booting software RAID1 is kind of an oddball case. You actually boot
>> on the disk that bios considers your boot drive only, and it works
>> because the drives are mirrored and happen to look the same whether
>> you look at the partition or the raid d
Les Mikesell wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 2:39 PM, wrote:
>>
>>> Booting software RAID1 is kind of an oddball case. You actually boot
>>> on the disk that bios considers your boot drive only, and it works
>>> because the drives are mirrored and happen to look the same whether
>>> you look at
On 12/06/2011 02:36 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 2:18 PM, Karanbir Singh wrote:
>> On 12/06/2011 08:09 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
>>> Any luck on the specific attack path yet? The linked article
>>> suggests Centos up to 5.5 was vulnerable.
>>
>> We dont have access to the actu
On Tuesday, December 06, 2011 04:45:04 PM Johnny Hughes wrote:
> If I had to guess, I would say that the attackers probably developed
> their code on CentOS, so they were looking for a CentOS machine to
> deploy their code on in the wild. That would be why I would say CentOS
> was the OS used.
I
Dec 7, 2011 5:58 AM Lamar Owen 작성:
> On Tuesday, December 06, 2011 04:45:04 PM Johnny Hughes wrote:
>> If I had to guess, I would say that the attackers probably developed
>> their code on CentOS, so they were looking for a CentOS machine to
>> deploy their code on in the wild. That would be w
On Tuesday, December 06, 2011 04:58:42 PM Lamar Owen wrote:
> I happen to have a copy of an older brute-forcer dictionary here (somewhere)
> and it's very large and has lots of very secure-seeming passwords in it.
I ran down the copy I have; here's an excerpt of one of the dictionaries:
Dec 7, 2011 2:43 AM Stephen Harris 작성:
>
> I can't upgrade these machines in a reasonable time period (production
> outage on core infra? Ugh) and need the values on the current systems.
>
I also have few important systems that are stuck in Centos 4.x. Can't afford
the downtime. So far it's
Is there an etiquitte to posting bounties to the centos community for OSS to be
packaged in rpm form for centos?
--
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
- -
- Jason Pyeron PD Inc. http:/
On Tue, Dec 06, 2011 at 06:01:50PM -0500, Jason Pyeron wrote:
> Is there an etiquitte to posting bounties to the centos community for
> OSS to be packaged in rpm form for centos?
Or, for a novel approach, you might save your money and consider
learning to package such applications yourself.
On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 3:45 PM, Johnny Hughes wrote:
>
Any luck on the specific attack path yet? The linked article
suggests Centos up to 5.5 was vulnerable.
>>>
>>> We dont have access to the actual machines that were broken into - so
>>> pretty much everything is second hand info.
>
On Tuesday, December 06, 2011 05:31:58 PM Fajar Priyanto wrote:
> Dec 7, 2011 5:58 AM Lamar Owen 작성:
> >I happen to have a copy of an older brute-forcer dictionary here (somewhere)
> >and it's very large and has lots of very secure-seeming passwords in it.
> Why not don't allow root login from s
Dec 7, 2011 7:05 AM Lamar Owen 작성:
> On Tuesday, December 06, 2011 05:31:58 PM Fajar Priyanto wrote:
>> Dec 7, 2011 5:58 AM Lamar Owen 작성:
>>> I happen to have a copy of an older brute-forcer dictionary here
>>> (somewhere) and it's very large and has lots of very secure-seeming
>>> password
2011/12/6 Fajar Priyanto :
>
I happen to have a copy of an older brute-forcer dictionary here
(somewhere) and it's very large and has lots of very secure-seeming
passwords in it.
>>
>>> Why not don't allow root login from ssh? That's basic yet effective.
>>
>> This particular brute
On Tue, 2011-12-06 at 18:12 -0600, Les Mikesell wrote:
> I'd expect it to be at least typical to firewall direct ssh access
> from the internet.
A Linux newcomer, untrained and a self-learner, I made an abrupt
immersion into Linux on 1 June 2010. It was a steep learning-curve.
The first thing I
- Original Message -
| On Tue, 2011-12-06 at 18:12 -0600, Les Mikesell wrote:
|
| > I'd expect it to be at least typical to firewall direct ssh access
| > from the internet.
|
| A Linux newcomer, untrained and a self-learner, I made an abrupt
| immersion into Linux on 1 June 2010. It was
On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 7:06 PM, James A. Peltier wrote:
> >
> Admins are not the incompetent ones. The users are! Any decent admin is
> going to ensure that there are the most layers and defensive systems in place
> to ensure a level of security that doesn't require the *USERS* to be rocket
>
On Tue, 2011-12-06 at 17:06 -0800, James A. Peltier wrote:
> | The first thing I did was to make a 20-odd character password for Root
> | with lowercase, uppercase and digits (using my former address in
> | Germany).
>
> Great! I'll do a little Google'ing and see if I can find out what that
>
On 12/6/2011 7:12 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
> 2011/12/6 Fajar Priyanto:
> I happen to have a copy of an older brute-forcer dictionary here
> (somewhere) and it's very large and has lots of very secure-seeming
> passwords in it.
Why not don't allow root login from ssh? That's basic
On 06/12/11 23:01, Jason Pyeron wrote:
> Is there an etiquitte to posting bounties to the centos community for OSS to
> be
> packaged in rpm form for centos?
>
The generally accepted route is to make a request on the mailing list of
an appropriate repository, for example, repoforge (rpmforge):
> -Original Message-
> From: centos-boun...@centos.org
> [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of John R. Dennison
> Sent: Tuesday, December 06, 2011 17:58
> To: centos@centos.org
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] [OT] posting bounties for rpms
> compatible with centos?
>
> On Tue, Dec 06,
Vreme: 12/07/2011 01:45 AM, Always Learning piše:
> The first thing I did was to make a 20-odd character password for Root
> with lowercase, uppercase and digits (using my former address in
> Germany).
I like using serial numbers from Motherboards and other hardware. It's
more random.
--
Ljubo
> -Original Message-
> From: centos-boun...@centos.org
> [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of Ned Slider
> Sent: Tuesday, December 06, 2011 21:15
> To: centos@centos.org
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] [OT] posting bounties for rpms
> compatible with centos?
>
> On 06/12/11 23:01, Jas
Op Woensdag, 7 december 03:45 +0100, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
> Vreme: 12/07/2011 01:45 AM, Always Learning piše:
> > The first thing I did was to make a 20-odd character password for Root
> > with lowercase, uppercase and digits (using my former address in
> > Germany).
>
> I like using seria
Vreme: 12/07/2011 03:49 AM, Always Learning piše:
>
> Op Woensdag, 7 december 03:45 +0100, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
>
>> Vreme: 12/07/2011 01:45 AM, Always Learning piše:
>>> The first thing I did was to make a 20-odd character password for Root
>>> with lowercase, uppercase and digits (using my
Hi !
Since the last couple of months, we had a few problems with the maner we
designed our clustered filesystem and we are planing to do a re-design
of the filesystems and how they are used.
Our cluster is composed of 8 nodes, connected via fibre channel, to a
raid enclosure where we have 6 pa
69 matches
Mail list logo
