similar to: Another Fedora decision

> On Jan 31, 2015, at 8:04 AM, James B. Byrne <byrnejb at harte-lyne.ca> wrote: > > 1. The password strength decision is driven by RH corporate. So who do you believe is driving RH corporate? Why are they expending the effort to do this? The answer is clear to me: general security principles. By the time EL8 comes out, we?ll have had ~3 years of warnings under EL7 that weak

On Mon, February 2, 2015 4:17 pm, Warren Young wrote: >> On Jan 31, 2015, at 8:04 AM, James B. Byrne <byrnejb at harte-lyne.ca> >> wrote: >> >> 1. The password strength decision is driven by RH corporate. > > So who do you believe is driving RH corporate? Why are they expending the > effort to do this? > > The answer is clear to me: general security

On Fri, 30 Jan 2015 14:15:05 -0800 Akemi Yagi <amyagi at gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 2:04 PM, Scott Robbins <scottro at nyc.rr.com> > wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 03:39:47PM -0600, Frank Cox wrote: > >> On Fri, 30 Jan 2015 16:13:17 -0500 > >> Scott Robbins wrote: > >> > You may have noticed how if Fedora, by some odd

On Mon, 2015-02-02 at 15:17 -0700, Warren Young wrote: > The answer is clear to me: general security principles. By the time EL8 comes out, we?ll have had ~3 years of warnings under EL7 that weak passwords would not be tolerated, and they?re finally disallowing them. Good! > > (More like 6 years, actually, because EL6 gives a red warning bar for weak passwords.) > > Let?s flip

On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 11:27:55PM +0000, Marko Vojinovic wrote: > On Fri, 30 Jan 2015 14:15:05 -0800 > Akemi Yagi <amyagi at gmail.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 2:04 PM, Scott Robbins <scottro at nyc.rr.com> > > wrote: > > >> > > >> Centos 7 does that as well. > > > Heh, I guess I've used good passwords in my installs

On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 4:09 PM, Scott Robbins <scottro at nyc.rr.com> wrote: > > There is some complaining going on on the Fedora testing list, > not sure where else one can protest. > The thread starts here: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2015-January/124827.html

On 01/30/2015 06:09 PM, Scott Robbins wrote: > On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 11:27:55PM +0000, Marko Vojinovic wrote: >> On Fri, 30 Jan 2015 14:15:05 -0800 >> Akemi Yagi <amyagi at gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 2:04 PM, Scott Robbins <scottro at nyc.rr.com> >>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Centos 7 does that as well.

On 3/27/23 03:25, rack00terry at icloud.com wrote: > Horses for courses perhaps. But I get way too much email, and > personally find book marking a current web conversation much easier. Not to sound rude, but sounds like a 'you' problem and not an 'Icecast mailing list' problem. > Moreover, I don?t want my email address shared with a massive (presumably) list, so I

On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 5:45 PM, Valeri Galtsev <galtsev at kicp.uchicago.edu> wrote: > > On Mon, February 2, 2015 5:26 pm, Les Mikesell wrote: >> On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 4:17 PM, Warren Young <wyml at etr-usa.com> wrote: >>>> >>> Let???s flip it around: what???s your justification *for* weak >>> passwords? >>> >> You don't

So, probably some of you, at least, follow Fedora, perhaps in part to see what new desktop user oriented decision will make it into the next version of RHEL/CentOS. You may have noticed how if Fedora, by some odd scheme, deems your password unworthy, you have to click Done two times. So, the latest Ananconda takes this one step further. Passwords that the system considers weak will no longer

Dear List: An e-mail mentioning the r-project.org address and sent to a friend at a German university was considered spam by the local spam filter. Its reasoning: the URL "r-project.org" is blacklisted at uribl.swinog.ch resp. at antispam.imp.ch. I checked the list http://antispam.imp.ch/swinog-uri-rbl.txt [caution: long list] and indeed, there it was. Can anybody explain how or

On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 4:17 PM, Warren Young <wyml at etr-usa.com> wrote: >> > Let?s flip it around: what?s your justification *for* weak passwords? > You don't need to write them down. Or trust some 3rd party password keeper to keep them. Whereas when 'not weak' is determined by someone else in the middle of trying to complete something, you are very likely to

Dear All, I am using a Procrustes analysis to compare two NMDS ordinations for the same set of sites. One ordination is based on fish data, the other is based on invertebrate data. Ordinations were derived using metaMDS() from the {vegan} library as follows: fish.mds<-metaMDS(fish.data, distance="bray", k=3, trymax=100, wascores=TRUE, trace=TRUE, zero="add")

On Mon, 2015-02-02 at 17:49 -0700, Warren Young wrote: > Polio was almost completely eradicated, but it?s starting to come back in the middle east after the CIA used a fake vaccination campaign as a pretext to try to get into bin Laden?s Pakistan compound: The Taliban were created and funded by the USA, using the Pakistani intelligence service, to give the Russian invaders of Afghanistan a

On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 2:03 PM, Always Learning <centos at u64.u22.net> wrote: > > Nothing wrong with letting "an expert" preconfigure the system and then, > after installation, the SysAdmin checking to ensure all the settings > satisfy the SysAdmin's requirements. > I'd just rather see them applying their expertise to actually making the code resist

I think it well to recall that the change which instigated this tempest was not to the network operations of a RHEL based system but to the 'INSTALLER' process, Anaconda. Now, I might be off base on this but really, ask yourself: Who exactly uses an installer program? And what is the threat model being addressed by requiring that the installer set a suitably strong password for root?

----- Oorspronkelijk bericht ----- Van: "PatrickD Garvey" <patrickdgarveyt at gmail.com> Aan: "CentOS mailing list" <centos at centos.org> Verzonden: Zaterdag 31 januari 2015 02:21:28 Onderwerp: Re: [CentOS] Another Fedora decision On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 4:09 PM, Scott Robbins <scottro at nyc.rr.com> wrote: > > There is some complaining going on on the

Hi, I have been trying to create a function to generate a Procrustes plot, generated from package "vegan" in lattice. standard vegan code as follows library(vegan) pro=protest(P1, P8, permutations=4999,choices=1:4) plot(pro) Now, here is the code for the function that I have failed to get to work properly. panel.procrustes=function(x,y) }Pro=protest(x,y,permutations=4999,choices=1:4)

It seems like every time I try to do something a little different, I cannot get output saved just right. This is on RedHat 7.2 with R 1.4.1. The png output looks fine, but the eps output has the problem that the bounding box on the legend cuts the legend in half. I put a copy of a bad one here: http://lark.cc.ukans.edu/~pauljohn/ResearchPapers/meanProtest-box.eps When I asked about these

On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 03:56:21PM +0000, Always Learning wrote: > Of course Alice can. All of us can. Hopefully it is constructive > criticism. Seeing good software being replaced by less good, less > useful and more awkward software usually provoke the software's users to > protest. Complaining on the CentOS list is probably not that productive, though. -- Jonathan Billings