josephcsible

Huh? You claimed there was a security vulnerability and I disagreed and asked for an example of it.

Things you own shouldn't enforce laws against you, especially with a guilty-until-proven-innocent system.

Can you give a counterexample?

If a malicious user can control the environment of critical system services, you're already pwned. There's no actual security issue there and no value in such a wrapper script.

> there are security implication when using LD_PRELOAD What do you mean?

There are advantages to having the filesystem do the snapshots itself. For example, if you have a really big file that you keep deleting and restoring from a snapshot, you'll only pay the cost of…

I don't see why this uses ssl_preread, since it does terminate the TLS and then just uses $ssl_server_name (as opposed to $ssl_preread_server_name) anyway. Also, it seems to be reimplementing stu…

XFS doesn't support whole-volume snapshots, which is the main reason I want CoW filesystems. And it also stands out as being basically the only filesystem that you can't arbitrarily shrink w…

> Bcachefs is not user space. bcachefs is still in-tree. > That is not true. There are out of tree modules such as ZFS. ZFS could be in-tree in no time at all if Oracle would fix its license. An…

> Having a working system after upgrading your kernel is not just a slight benefit. It's table stakes. We already have that, with the "don't break userspace" policy combined wit…

You are correct. Actual security needs to be inherently part of the application; you can't get it just by slapping something in front of it. And the way most WAFs work is basically just a fancier…

The slight benefit for out-of-tree module authors wouldn't be worth the negative effects on the rest of the kernel to everyone else.

I'm not saying that it's easy or that I could do it. I'm just saying that if it does happen, it would be a good thing, not something you should be opposed to.

Rust being mandatory in Linux will be a good thing. I eagerly await the day that (aside from arch-specific syscall boundary code, etc. that has to be assembly) the entire kernel becomes 100% Rust only…

> Is there a reason you find this particularly disturbing? It's contrary to the human right of freedom of speech. It's bad for all the same reasons that lèse-majesté laws are, but is even…

Sure, you don't know whether BB(x) < b or BB(x) > b for that reason, but wouldn't you still know BB(x) ≠ b, and isn't that good enough?

It would be one thing to say "you must offer our payment method as an option to users". It's another to say "our payment method must be the only option you offer to users". …

> If a company invests billions in R&D to create hardware and its integrated software, shouldn’t it have the right to control who or what interacts with it? Why should I be forced to open up th…

Does it matter? My reading is basically "if you have two distinct candidates, isn't that a way to always disprove at least one of them?"

I notice this too.

> (2) ZFC is consistent with two different statements, "BB(x) = a" and "BB(x) = b" for two different a, b. This means that a disproof of either statement cannot exist. > This…