It’s also difficult for developers to publish to Linux because of the wide variety of different Linux systems.
I disagree there. The issue is that in Windows people bring over their own version of libraries they compiled on (the millions of .dll files) and you can even look in your Uninstall Apps settings where there's a bunch of MS specific runtime bundles to see that's even an issue in the MS ecosystem.
In Linux, developers have relied on the library versions just being there. It is, I'd argue, the most compelling reason package managers basically had to come into existence. On the flip-side this can cause issues where there is some version on the system by the package manager that replaces another version. And something not a part of that package management system isn't a part of those dependency checks and if they don't put the libraries with the binaries...well it is just luck if you have them all or if other versions can support those library calls in the same way still.
In Linux that is all those .so's in /var/lib and stuff.
You don't really see many proprietary things using package managers and those that do are packaged by someone else and are in some sort of repo that isn't part of the vanilla install because of legal caution.
Companies that made their money on porting games to Linux prior to Proton basically causing them to shutter Linux porting would put their .so's in with the game bundle themselves, just like you see happening in Windows when .dll's are inside the actual program's folders.
However, the more that this sort of dependency management has become abstracted by development suites that take care of this for the developers, the less they understand about it.
Flatpaks actually take care of this and it is one reason they are so popular. They figure out (well that's a simplification) those library dependencies, sandbox the apps with those dependencies so the library paths don't interfere with other flatpaks or the base system itself. People complain about this as a con because "the download is BIGGER" even though flatpak doesn't install the same runtimes over and over again, so once they are there, the download may still be bigger but the installed storage isn't.
Anyway, yes Linus Torvalds complained about the "Linux fragmentation" issue but it was about DE's not the state of the development ecosystem itself as I recall, though the rant is very old, so maybe I don't remember all of it.
Wider application support would be a start.
Sure, but that's not a Linux problem, that's a developer problem. Linux supports application development just fine. It is a kernel and the surrounding ecosystem is the operating system after all. It is developers that don't support it. That isn't really something Linux in and of itself can effectively solve. Users have to increase and developers supporting applications for Linux will also increase. The classic Linux Chicken and the Egg problem but it is capitalism and that's just going to be how it has to work.
We also have statements from the IDF that this actually happened. It's in the linked article. In the first sentence.
It is also DRM free on Steam. You can copy the rimworld folder to a PC that's never had Steam on it and play it as an example.
You can also do that to sort of save a snapshot in time of Rimworld when they are releasing a new version that will likely break mods for a long time/sometimes forever.
I don't know, I like using Fleet Commander with FreeIPA (where it stores the profile). You just spin up the template VM for whatever like-clients on the network you want to make default profiles for and make the changes, shut it down, checkbox the changes (the configurations and stuff) that you approve and let it apply the profiles across the network. Easier than depending on Puppet or Ansible playbooks IMO.
I have had issues with SSSD as well though and it had to do with Kerberos tickets but I can't remember what I did to fix it. We'd have to manually use kinit on each machine when it'd basically fall off the realm. I want to say it was a DNS issue but it was so long ago, I just don't remember.
We used to use Centrify for Linux and Solaris and it was easy using Access Manager to basically handle AD users and computers with Active Directory and had some GPO support (you could push config writes with GPOs for example and organize it all via OUs for example) but it would get a little wonky between trusts in the forest sometimes (in regards to zone management in Centrify) and they kept getting more expensive. Maybe they've fixed that stuff now but it was really simple to use and you could basically manage a lot through the AD and create group profiles in the Access Manager. I think the last straw was wanting to force us to license the entire suite regardless of whether we were using it or not. Personally, I never liked it because it wouldn't use SSSD or kclient/nsswitch and if some service tried to join the realm/domain, it'd join using the same computer accounts and basically break the account since Centrify used its own client, so you'd specifically need to join the computer accounts via Centrify as a different name. It wasn't detrimental or anything -- just annoying that it was a problem at all. Also, sometimes the user cache database saved in specific users' appdata that use Access Manager would corrupt from time to time and you'd need to manually delete it to use Access Manager. I'd hope they fixed that by now too though.
All and all, I'm not saying Active Directory isn't an excellent product because it is and I'm not saying that there is a 1:1 solution for Linux but I'm saying it that in my experience it isn't terrible either with FreeIPA and products you can use with it. I definitely hated other 389 solutions prior to FreeIPA though.
For Linux user management you can just use an LDAP solution like FreeIPA. You can even tailor sudoer rules based on security groups, so like you can allow someone to reboot the server but not actually make configuration changes to system config files and what-not. It'll also handle CA and PKI with smart card support and of course DNS. It has a web interface as well.
a stack of 18650s
(you probably already know) but this is common in a lot of battery packs. Batteries for power tools are good sources for the 18650s too. I never checked but I saw someone open a Tesla car battery and they look like a bunch of 18650s inside too.
I refurbish my power tool batteries instead of buying new ones because it is so easy.
Having a NAT on a consumer router is indeed the norm. I don't even see how you could say it is not.
I never said NAT = security. As a matter of fact, I even said
It was not designed for security but coincidentally blah blah
But hey, strawmanning didn't stop your original comment to me either, so why stop there?
Let me tell you: All. Modern. Routers. include a stateful firewall.
I never even implied the opposite.
To Linux at least, NAT is just a special kind of firewall rule called masquerade.
Right, because masquerade is NAT....specifically Source NAT.
I'm just going to go ahead an unsubscribe from this conversation.
So, really, you were "correcting" me for you and your specific setup at the very beginning because your router's firewall has a deny rule for all inbound connections because I must have been confusing what a NAT and what a firewall is because I must have been talking about your specific configuration on your specific devices.
Holy. Fucking. Shit.
Are you saying that everyone's router's firewall drops all packets from connections that originate from outside of their network?
Because, as I said:
layer 7 firewalls for the network which are going to be where most the majority of attacks are concentrated.
The NAT doesn't have to operate at layer 7 to be effective for this because
coincidentally it is doing the heavy lifting for home network security because it is dropping packets from connections originating from outside the network, barring of course, forwarded ports and DMZ hosts because the router has no idea where to route them.
The point is that the SPI firewalls are not protecting against the majority of the attacks we've seen for decades now from botnets and other arbitrary sources of attacks, except, perhaps targeted DDoSing which isn't the big problems for most home networks. They must worry about having their OS' and software exploited and owned in the background, which doesn't get much of an assist from a router's firewall.
Obviously, this is however true for the NAT since the NAT are going to drop connections originating from outside the network attempting to communicate with that software to exploit it
barring of course, forwarded ports and DMZ hosts because the router has no idea where to route them.
They are not layer 7 firewalls for the network which are going to be where most the majority of attacks are concentrated. No citation needed unless you believe they are layer 7 firewalls or using something like Snort.
Added some clarification in my first sentence so it makes a bit of sense.
The word you are looking for is firewall not NAT.
No the word I'm looking for is the NAT. It was not designed for security but coincidentally it is doing the heavy lifting for home network security because it is dropping packets from connections originating from outside the network, barring of course, forwarded ports and DMZ hosts because the router has no idea where to route them.
Consumer router firewalls are generally trash, certainly aren't layer 7 firewalls protecting from all the SMB, printer, AD, etc etc vulnerabilities and definitely are not doing the heavy lifting.
By and large automated attacks are not thwarted by the firewall but by the one-way NAT.
You'd better hope that you can NAT ipv6 because if you aren't behind a CGNAT and then your LAN is completely exposed without a NAT you're very likely going to have devices exploited.
NATs on people's boundary has been doing pretty much all of the heavy lifting for everyone's security at home.
PlayOnLinux? When was this, 15 years ago?
One is being charged because they took the stand in a trial in which someone was convicted for a crime....due to their false report.
However, I'd say they should each be indicted on each count of false reports and false arrests.
They also illegally searched children because they were so lazy on responding to a ShotSpotter (which by the way, also has its share of criticism and abuse) response that they took a legal firearm from their mother (who were waiting on a bus and told them that she had a firearm when asked) and said they found it near the scene of the shots fired. One of the cops then said "this never happened" as they left.
Huh. I'm pretty sure I heard about this happening. It was 1994/5 I want to say. I grew up in Charlotte and was still in school then for context.
You set up Fedora desktop distros with a GUI installer.