On Wed, 2014-05-28 at 21:39 -0500, Barry Brimer wrote:
> I believe auditctl could help:
>
> https://access.redhat.com/site/documentation/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/6/html/Security_Guide/sec-Defining_Audit_Rules_and_Controls.html
> http://www.cyberciti.biz/tips/linux-audit-files-to-see-who-ma
Hi,
I have a question about this vulnerability. Could someone please help me
which packages i should upgrade in Centos 6 to fix this vulnerability? I
don't want to perform upgrade of whole system with "yum upgrade".
--
Best Regards,
*Alexander Danilov*
__
On 05/28/14 23:03, Tim Dunphy wrote:
>
> Ok well the permissions change happened again! And this time I was able to
> capture some output thanks to your helpful tip on how to handle the
> situation.
>
> However I'm not sure how to interpret the output I got and was wondering if
> I could have some
Send CentOS-announce mailing list submissions to
centos-annou...@centos.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-announce
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
centos-announce-requ..
> -Original Message-
> From: Alexander Danilov
> Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2014 7:14
>
> Hi,
>
> I have a question about this vulnerability. Could someone
> please help me
Google can help.
https://www.google.com/search?q=CVE-2014-0196 gives you
https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?
On 05/28/2014 10:52 PM, Fred Smith wrote:
> I didn't do that, but what I did do was download a nightly build
> for Fedora 21, a live CD image, burn it to a disc and boot that.
> One would think it has a recent kernel (I neglected to look while
> it was running to find out what kernel it was).
>
>
On 05/29/2014 07:04 AM, Jason Pyeron wrote:
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Alexander Danilov
>> Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2014 7:14
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I have a question about this vulnerability. Could someone
>> please help me
> Google can help.
>
> https://www.google.com/search?q=CVE-2014-019
> -Original Message-
> From: Johnny Hughes
> Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2014 8:46
>
> I want to be very clear on CVE's and the way they are tested
> at CentOS.
>
> First, I want to ensure everyone knows that CentOS does NOT usually do
> any verification with respect to CVE issues. We build
Just in case my previous mail was not clear enough on this:
"Before applying this update, make sure all previously released errata
relevant to your system have been applied."
That is what every single Red Hat Security Update says ... and so then
the question is, what is "errata".
Errata is ALL
On 05/28/2014 02:26 PM, Bowie Bailey wrote:
> On 5/28/2014 3:00 PM, Michael Hennebry wrote:
>> On Wed, 28 May 2014, Bowie Bailey wrote:
>>
>>> On 5/28/2014 1:29 AM, Michael Hennebry wrote:
On Tue, 27 May 2014, John R Pierce wrote:
> On 5/27/2014 5:38 PM, Michael Hennebry wrote:
>>
Johnny Hughes wrote:
> On 05/28/2014 02:26 PM, Bowie Bailey wrote:
>> On 5/28/2014 3:00 PM, Michael Hennebry wrote:
>>> On Wed, 28 May 2014, Bowie Bailey wrote:
>>>
On 5/28/2014 1:29 AM, Michael Hennebry wrote:
> On Tue, 27 May 2014, John R Pierce wrote:
>
>> On 5/27/2014 5:38 PM,
29.05.2014 16:59, Johnny Hughes ?:
>
>
> Just in case my previous mail was not clear enough on this:
>
> "Before applying this update, make sure all previously released errata
> relevant to your system have been applied."
>
> That is what every single Red Hat Security Update says ... and so th
On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 07:12:24AM -0500, Johnny Hughes wrote:
> On 05/28/2014 10:52 PM, Fred Smith wrote:
> > I didn't do that, but what I did do was download a nightly build
> > for Fedora 21, a live CD image, burn it to a disc and boot that.
> > One would think it has a recent kernel (I neglecte
On 05/29/2014 08:34 AM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
> Johnny Hughes wrote:
>> On 05/28/2014 02:26 PM, Bowie Bailey wrote:
>>> On 5/28/2014 3:00 PM, Michael Hennebry wrote:
On Wed, 28 May 2014, Bowie Bailey wrote:
> On 5/28/2014 1:29 AM, Michael Hennebry wrote:
>> On Tue, 27 May 2014,
On 05/29/2014 10:39 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote:
> On 05/29/2014 08:34 AM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
>>
>> I was under the impression that the OP actually doesn't want it visible to
>> the world, isn't intending to browse or email via it, but that it was for
>> *only* inside. IF that is the case, he'd
Robert Moskowitz wrote:
> On 05/29/2014 10:39 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote:
>> On 05/29/2014 08:34 AM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
>>>
>>> I was under the impression that the OP actually doesn't want it visible
>>> to the world, isn't intending to browse or email via it, but that it was
>>> for *only* insi
Hey, folks,
I'm working on finding some new compute nodes. What I'm looking for is
a 64 core box, with room enough for a lot of RAM. I can get it from
Dell, or HP (bleah! a 4U box), but I need to have three quotes, y'know.
We've gotten a lot from Penguin in the past, but they're all
Supermicro,
On 29 May 2014 16:26, wrote:
> Hey, folks,
>
>I'm working on finding some new compute nodes. What I'm looking for is
> a 64 core box, with room enough for a lot of RAM. I can get it from
> Dell, or HP (bleah! a 4U box), but I need to have three quotes, y'know.
> We've gotten a lot from Pengui
Andrew Holway wrote:
> On 29 May 2014 16:26, wrote:
>
>>I'm working on finding some new compute nodes. What I'm looking for
>> is a 64 core box, with room enough for a lot of RAM. I can get it from
>> Dell, or HP (bleah! a 4U box), but I need to have three quotes, y'know.
>> We've gotten a lot
On 05/29/2014 11:21 AM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
> Robert Moskowitz wrote:
>> On 05/29/2014 10:39 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote:
>>> On 05/29/2014 08:34 AM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
I was under the impression that the OP actually doesn't want it visible
to the world, isn't intending to bro
On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 10:46 AM, wrote:
>
> I agree. But I do need a third quote, though I suppose I could get a
> reseller along with Dell and the HP. I was sort of looking for anther
> vendor that's got 64 cores in 1U (the Dell's 2U).
If you are looking for density, shouldn't you be using bla
Robert Moskowitz wrote:
>
> On 05/29/2014 11:21 AM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
>> Robert Moskowitz wrote:
>>> On 05/29/2014 10:39 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote:
On 05/29/2014 08:34 AM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
>
> I was under the impression that the OP actually doesn't want it
> visible to
On 05/29/2014 12:11 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
> On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 10:46 AM, wrote:
>> I agree. But I do need a third quote, though I suppose I could get a
>> reseller along with Dell and the HP. I was sort of looking for anther
>> vendor that's got 64 cores in 1U (the Dell's 2U).
> If you ar
I'm not sure if this is helpful to anyone else and I can't
decide if it's mildly clever or just a stupid pet trick, really.
I recently decided to reinstall my work laptop with
centos. as part of the install I used an 8g
sandisk USB drive; it's roughly the size of a
wireless mouse receiver. I put
My modem/router is a PK5001Z from CenturyLink.
IIRC a tech support person told me that it uses ppp internally.
With regard to security,
I would prefer to trust Windows or the modem/router as little as possible,
hence the desire to connect the Windows box to the main box.
I would like to be able t
On 05/28/2014 03:27 PM, John R Pierce wrote:
> On 5/28/2014 12:00 PM, Michael Hennebry wrote:
>> I want the second computer to not have its own global IP address.
>> It will at least occasionally run Windows.
>> I'd prefer not to assume that Windows will
>> not try to fetch an IP address behind my
zep wrote:
>
> On 05/29/2014 12:11 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
>> On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 10:46 AM, wrote:
>>> I agree. But I do need a third quote, though I suppose I could get a
>>> reseller along with Dell and the HP. I was sort of looking for anther
>>> vendor that's got 64 cores in 1U (the Dell'
Michael Hennebry wrote:
> My modem/router is a PK5001Z from CenturyLink.
> IIRC a tech support person told me that it uses ppp internally.
>
> With regard to security,
> I would prefer to trust Windows or the modem/router as little as possible,
> hence the desire to connect the Windows box to the m
On 05/29/2014 01:09 PM, Lamar Owen wrote:
> Choice of terminology is pretty important; Cisco's consistent (if a
> bit awkward) four-way terminology for NAT (inside local, inside
> global, outside local, outside global;...
See the Cisco whitepaper entitled "Enabling Enterprise Multihoming with
Ci
On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 11:48 AM, Michael Hennebry
wrote:
> My modem/router is a PK5001Z from CenturyLink.
> IIRC a tech support person told me that it uses ppp internally.
The thing looks like a typical NAT router to me. Are you sure you are
getting public IP numbers on the LAN side?
> With re
zep wrote:
>
> On 05/29/2014 12:11 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
>> On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 10:46 AM, wrote:
>>> I agree. But I do need a third quote, though I suppose I could get a
>>> reseller along with Dell and the HP. I was sort of looking for anther
>>> vendor that's got 64 cores in 1U (the Dell'
>
> On the last, Dell's hard to beat. Sun/Oracle ranks under "none of the
> above" So
>
If you can find someone selling these puppies in the US Intel server
platforms are rather nice:
http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/server-systems/server-board-s4600lh-lt-systems.html
http://www.in
On 5/29/2014 8:46 AM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
> I agree. But I do need a third quote,
Lenovo ?
--
john r pierce 37N 122W
somewhere on the middle of the left coast
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://
Andrew Holway wrote:
>>
>> On the last, Dell's hard to beat. Sun/Oracle ranks under "none of the
>> above" So
>>
> If you can find someone selling these puppies in the US Intel server
> platforms are rather nice:
>
> http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/server-systems/server-board-s4600lh
>
> Look nice... but trying to google someone selling *servers* with the board
> isn't getting me anywhere. I happened across the Asus RS927, but that,
> after much looking, turns out to only do 32 cores max. Got a clue on
> models of *server*, from anyone, that uses the Intel board?
>
Intel® Serv
John R Pierce wrote:
> On 5/29/2014 8:46 AM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
>> I agree. But I do need a third quote,
>
> Lenovo ?
>
The only rackmounts I see from their site are dual processor. I'll need
four - mostly, I see 16-core CPUs in our systems, though some have 12-core
(or the weird 10-core). The
On 5/29/2014 10:48 AM, Andrew Holway wrote:
>> >On the last, Dell's hard to beat. Sun/Oracle ranks under "none of the
>> >above" So
>> >
> If you can find someone selling these puppies in the US Intel server
> platforms are rather nice:
>
> http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/server-syst
On 5/29/2014 11:34 AM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
> John R Pierce wrote:
>> >On 5/29/2014 8:46 AM,m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
>>> >>I agree. But I do need a third quote,
>> >
>> >Lenovo ?
>> >
> The only rackmounts I see from their site are dual processor. I'll need
> four - mostly, I see 16-core CPUs in
Andrew Holway wrote:
>>
>> Look nice... but trying to google someone selling *servers* with the
>> board isn't getting me anywhere. I happened across the Asus RS927, but
that,
>> after much looking, turns out to only do 32 cores max. Got a clue on
>> models of *server*, from anyone, that uses the I
John R Pierce wrote:
> On 5/29/2014 11:34 AM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
>> John R Pierce wrote:
>>> >On 5/29/2014 8:46 AM,m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
>>I agree. But I do need a third quote,
>>> >
>>> >Lenovo ?
>>> >
>> The only rackmounts I see from their site are dual processor. I'll need
>> four
>
>
> Does anyone have any preferred *vendors* - as I say, we used to like
> Penguin. Silicon Mechanics? AVADirect? I'm just throwing out names here
> I've run into while googling.
>
How many of these are you after?
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.
Andrew Holway wrote:
>>
>> Does anyone have any preferred *vendors* - as I say, we used to like
>> Penguin. Silicon Mechanics? AVADirect? I'm just throwing out names here
>> I've run into while googling.
>
> How many of these are you after?
The budget's limited - maybe one, maybe two, but next yea
m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
> Andrew Holway wrote:
>>>
>>> Does anyone have any preferred *vendors* - as I say, we used to like
>>> Penguin. Silicon Mechanics? AVADirect? I'm just throwing out names here
>>> I've run into while googling.
>>
>> How many of these are you after?
>
> The budget's limited -
>
> serious HPC.
>
As opposed to silly HPC? Molecular dynamics huh. Those memory loving SOBs
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Andrew Holway wrote:
>>
>> serious HPC.
>
> As opposed to silly HPC? Molecular dynamics huh. Those memory loving SOBs
Protein folding, among other things.
mark
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/cen
>
>
> Protein folding, among other things.
>
Doesn't that stuff parallelise? Quad socket boxes are pretty rare in HPC
nowadays as the amount of memory available in a dual socket box is so high.
Infiniband?
>
> mark
>
> ___
> CentOS mailing list
Andrew Holway wrote:
>>
>> Protein folding, among other things.
>
> Doesn't that stuff parallelise? Quad socket boxes are pretty rare in HPC
> nowadays as the amount of memory available in a dual socket box is so
> high.
>
> Infiniband?
Not on this. But the code's written with parallelization - it
On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 2:13 PM, wrote:
> >
> As a comparison, the Penguins that we got a couple-three years ago were in
> the $11k range, and were 1U Supermicros. The Dell and HP I'm looking at
> are about $13k, so that's around where I'm looking.
HP blades pop up with a list price around $12k.
On 5/29/2014 1:11 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
> On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 2:13 PM, wrote:
>>> > >
>> >As a comparison, the Penguins that we got a couple-three years ago were in
>> >the $11k range, and were 1U Supermicros. The Dell and HP I'm looking at
>> >are about $13k, so that's around where I'm look
On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 03:35:01PM -0400, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
> Andrew Holway wrote:
> >>
> >> serious HPC.
> >
> > As opposed to silly HPC? Molecular dynamics huh. Those memory loving SOBs
>
> Protein folding, among other things.
the FoldingAtHome project? with that much horsepower you must
On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 07:12:24AM -0500, Johnny Hughes wrote:
> On 05/28/2014 10:52 PM, Fred Smith wrote:
> > I didn't do that, but what I did do was download a nightly build
> > for Fedora 21, a live CD image, burn it to a disc and boot that.
> > One would think it has a recent kernel (I neglecte
OK, I have installed CentOS 6.5 on this beast using parted to make GPT
partitions (royal PIA, but done). The machine has three 500G SATA disks with
4K sector sizes.
Partitioned with three partions for each of the main disks:
sda1 => FAT32 => /boot/efi
sdb1 => FAT32 => (not presently mounted, b
We switched from HP to Fujitsu a couple of years ago, and couldn't be
happier. Look into their RX line, I think the RX500 and RX900 (iirc) do
4 and 8 socket.
digimer
On 29/05/14 11:26 AM, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
> Hey, folks,
>
> I'm working on finding some new compute nodes. What I'm looki
I'd also recommend Fujitsu. If you're desperate there is the SGI H2106-G7
in 2U size.
On May 29, 2014 8:52 PM, "Digimer" wrote:
> We switched from HP to Fujitsu a couple of years ago, and couldn't be
> happier. Look into their RX line, I think the RX500 and RX900 (iirc) do
> 4 and 8 socket.
>
> d
On 5/29/2014 6:00 PM, Evan Rowley wrote:
> I'd also recommend Fujitsu. If you're desperate there is the SGI H2106-G7
> in 2U size.
the SGI stuff I've seen has been rebranded Supermicro boxes/boards.
--
john r pierce 37N 122W
somewhere on the middle of the l
--On Thursday, May 29, 2014 12:43:16 PM -0400 zep
wrote:
> I'm not sure if this is helpful to anyone else and I can't
> decide if it's mildly clever or just a stupid pet trick, really.
[...]
> I put /boot, / and /usr on
> the USB drive, set encrypted partitions for
> swap, /home, /opt, /var and p
Every time I update my system with clamav, it doesn't restart and freshclam no
longer works, because of a permission issue on the log directory. Each time I
update clamav I have to search the Internet to figure out what there is to do.
That NEVER helps so I try different combinations on user a
57 matches
Mail list logo
