How NSA access was built into Windows
Gene Heskett
gene.heskett at verizon.net
Tue Jan 16 06:55:20 UTC 2007
On Tuesday 16 January 2007 00:13, Lyvim Xaphir wrote:
>On Mon, 2007-01-15 at 22:58 -0600, Steven P. Ulrick wrote:
>> On Mon, 15 Jan 2007 22:57:37 -0500
>>
>> Lyvim Xaphir <knightmerc at yahoo.com> wrote:
>> > On Tue, 2007-01-16 at 13:47 +1030, Tim wrote:
>> > > Ralf Corsepius:
>> > > >>> One thing I can tell for sure: There is still a noticeable
>> > > >>> group of Linux users in Europe, for whom this incident and the
>> > > >>> NSA's involvement into SELinux is an argument for "not
>> > > >>> choosing" Fedora.
>> > >
>> > > Claude Jones
>> > >
>> > > >> I'm not surprised, and I have heard that myself - in fact, that
>> > > >> comes up quite frequently in other forums and lists - I just
>> > > >> haven't seen much discussion of it here...
>> > >
>> > > Anne Wilson:
>> > > > That reads as though Fedora is the only one employing SELinux.
>> > > > I'm sure that's not so, and I've definitely seen it proposed in
>> > > > magazines as the way forward that will become a de facto
>> > > > standard.
>> > >
>> > > Taking the opposite line of attack, it is possible to completely
>> > > remove it from a Linux installation, isn't it?
>> >
>> > Good question. I'd like to find out about that myself.
>>
>> Hello, Everyone
>> I don't know if this is a full answer to the above question, but I
>> thought that I'd try running "yum remove *selinux*" just for fun. See
>> the result at: http://www.afolkey2.net/Projects/selinux.txt
>>
>> For the impatient, the file referred to above says that I would need
>> to
>>
>> remove 979 RPM's:
>> > Transaction Summary
>> > ====================================================================
>> >========= Install 0 Package(s)
>> > Update 0 Package(s)
>> > Remove 979 Package(s)
>>
>> Here is the output of rpm -qa on my system:
>> http://www.afolkey2.net/Projects/rpm.txt
>>
>> It shows that 1,617 RPM's are installed on my system. So, if I would
>> remove all *selinux* packages, I would have 638 RPM's left.
>> Unfortunately, I would have no kernel:
>> kernel i686 2.6.18-1.2868.fc6 installed
>> 44 M kernel i686 2.6.18-1.2869.fc6 installed
>> 44 M kernel i586 2.6.18-1.2849.fc6
>> installed 43 M kernel-devel i686
>> 2.6.18-1.2868.fc6 installed 14 M kernel-devel
>> i586 2.6.18-1.2798.fc6 installed 14 M kernel-devel
>> i686 2.6.18-1.2869.fc6 installed 14 M
>> kernel-devel i586 2.6.18-1.2849.fc6 installed
>> 14 M
>>
>> I am not an expert. I only submit this for the experts to interpret.
>>
>> Steven P. Ulrick
>>
>> --
>> 22:58:26 up 42 days, 5:06, 0 users, load average: 0.18, 0.41, 0.44
>
>Wow. That just pegged my absurd-o-meter.
>
>This is a little *too* difficult. Now I'm wondering about rpm --force
>--nodeps. Think I'll give that a try.
>
>
>LX
I believe you will have to build a generic kernel.org kernel, configured
without that support, something I have underway right now, using
2.6.20-rc4. I was amazed at the number of options I found turned on that
a proper 'make oldconfig' should absolutely never have turned on. My
scripts take care of everything but grub.conf for a kernel install, so
when its done all I should have to do is reboot since I'm already running
2.6.20-rc4. Several things I found may even account for the apparent
slowness of later kernels. Things like 15 seconds to launch firefox on
an xp-2800 athlon with a gig of ram?
--
Cheers, Gene
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Yahoo.com and AOL/TW attorneys please note, additions to the above
message by Gene Heskett are:
Copyright 2007 by Maurice Eugene Heskett, all rights reserved.
More information about the fedora-list
mailing list