Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.debian.user > #232278 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2021-03-02 21:10 +0100 |
| Last post | 2021-03-11 00:20 +0100 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 84 — 20 participants |
Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.user
Installation problems Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2021-03-02 21:10 +0100
Re: Installation problems Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2021-03-02 21:40 +0100
Re: Installation problems Weaver <weaver@riseup.net> - 2021-03-02 22:20 +0100
Re: Installation problems <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2021-03-02 22:30 +0100
Re: Installation problems Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2021-03-03 00:10 +0100
Re: Installation problems Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2021-03-02 22:50 +0100
Re: Installation problems "Andrew M.A. Cater" <amacater@einval.com> - 2021-03-02 23:20 +0100
Re: Installation problems Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2021-03-03 02:40 +0100
Re: Installation problems Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2021-03-03 02:50 +0100
Re: Installation problems Keith Bainbridge <ke1thozgroups@gmx.com> - 2021-03-03 00:00 +0100
Re: Installation problems Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2021-03-03 10:30 +0100
Re: Installation problems David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> - 2021-03-03 15:40 +0100
Re: Installation problems Celejar <celejar@gmail.com> - 2021-03-03 16:40 +0100
Re: Installation problems Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2021-03-03 16:40 +0100
Re: Installation problems David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> - 2021-03-03 22:40 +0100
Re: Installation problems Joe <joe@jretrading.com> - 2021-03-03 23:00 +0100
Re: Installation problems Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2021-03-04 13:00 +0100
Re: Installation problems Tixy <tixy@yxit.co.uk> - 2021-03-04 13:30 +0100
Re: Installation problems Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2021-03-04 14:00 +0100
Re: Installation problems Felix Miata <mrmazda@earthlink.net> - 2021-03-04 17:30 +0100
Re: Installation problems Keith Bainbridge <ke1thozgroups@gmx.com> - 2021-03-02 23:50 +0100
Re: Installation problems David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2021-03-03 03:50 +0100
Re: Installation problems Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2021-03-03 10:50 +0100
Re: Installation problems Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2021-03-03 11:20 +0100
Re: Installation problems Keith Bainbridge <ke1thozgroups@gmx.com> - 2021-03-03 00:00 +0100
PARTIAL DIAGNOSIS of Installation problems Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2021-03-03 16:30 +0100
Re: PARTIAL DIAGNOSIS of Installation problems David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> - 2021-03-03 22:30 +0100
Re: PARTIAL DIAGNOSIS of Installation problems Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2021-03-03 23:00 +0100
Re: PARTIAL DIAGNOSIS of Installation problems David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> - 2021-03-04 02:50 +0100
Re: PARTIAL DIAGNOSIS of Installation problems Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2021-03-04 03:50 +0100
Re: PARTIAL DIAGNOSIS of Installation problems David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> - 2021-03-04 04:20 +0100
Re: PARTIAL DIAGNOSIS of Installation problems Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2021-03-04 05:10 +0100
Re: PARTIAL DIAGNOSIS of Installation problems <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2021-03-04 10:00 +0100
Trusting trust [was: PARTIAL DIAGNOSIS of Installation problems] <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2021-03-04 09:50 +0100
Re: Trusting trust [was: PARTIAL DIAGNOSIS of Installation problems] Joe <joe@jretrading.com> - 2021-03-04 10:50 +0100
Re: Trusting trust [was: PARTIAL DIAGNOSIS of Installation problems] <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2021-03-04 14:20 +0100
Re: Trusting trust [was: PARTIAL DIAGNOSIS of Installation problems] Celejar <celejar@gmail.com> - 2021-03-04 15:30 +0100
Re: Trusting trust [was: PARTIAL DIAGNOSIS of Installation problems] tomas@tuxteam.de - 2021-03-04 16:20 +0100
Re: Trusting trust [was: PARTIAL DIAGNOSIS of Installation problems] Celejar <celejar@gmail.com> - 2021-03-04 17:20 +0100
Re: Trusting trust [was: PARTIAL DIAGNOSIS of Installation problems] tomas@tuxteam.de - 2021-03-04 19:10 +0100
Re: Trusting trust [was: PARTIAL DIAGNOSIS of Installation problems] Celejar <celejar@gmail.com> - 2021-03-04 19:30 +0100
Re: Trusting trust [was: PARTIAL DIAGNOSIS of Installation problems] Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2021-03-04 23:20 +0100
Re: Trusting trust [was: PARTIAL DIAGNOSIS of Installation problems] <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2021-03-04 23:40 +0100
Re: Trusting trust [was: PARTIAL DIAGNOSIS of Installation problems] Joe <joe@jretrading.com> - 2021-03-04 23:50 +0100
Re: Trusting trust [was: PARTIAL DIAGNOSIS of Installation problems] Celejar <celejar@gmail.com> - 2021-03-04 15:30 +0100
Re: Trusting trust [was: PARTIAL DIAGNOSIS of Installation problems] Celejar <celejar@gmail.com> - 2021-03-04 14:20 +0100
Re: Trusting trust [was: PARTIAL DIAGNOSIS of Installation problems] Joe <joe@jretrading.com> - 2021-03-04 16:10 +0100
Re: Trusting trust [was: PARTIAL DIAGNOSIS of Installation problems] Celejar <celejar@gmail.com> - 2021-03-04 17:20 +0100
OT: Bathroom scales (was: Re: Trusting trust [was: PARTIAL DIAGNOSIS of Installation problems]) rhkramer@gmail.com - 2021-03-04 17:40 +0100
Re: Trusting trust [was: PARTIAL DIAGNOSIS of Installation problems] David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> - 2021-03-04 23:30 +0100
[OFFTOPIC] Re: Trusting trust [was: PARTIAL DIAGNOSIS of Installation problems] Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2021-03-05 04:00 +0100
Re: [OFFTOPIC] Re: Trusting trust [was: PARTIAL DIAGNOSIS of Installation problems] David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> - 2021-03-05 06:30 +0100
Re: [OFFTOPIC] Re: Trusting trust [was: PARTIAL DIAGNOSIS of Installation problems] David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> - 2021-03-05 06:40 +0100
Re: [OFFTOPIC] Re: Trusting trust [was: PARTIAL DIAGNOSIS of Installation problems] Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2021-03-05 07:40 +0100
Re: [OFFTOPIC] Re: Trusting trust [was: PARTIAL DIAGNOSIS of Installation problems] <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2021-03-05 09:20 +0100
Re: [OFFTOPIC] Re: Trusting trust [was: PARTIAL DIAGNOSIS of Installation problems] Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2021-03-05 15:10 +0100
Re: PARTIAL DIAGNOSIS of Installation problems Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2021-03-04 13:30 +0100
Re: PARTIAL DIAGNOSIS of Installation problems David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2021-03-04 18:50 +0100
Re: PARTIAL DIAGNOSIS of Installation problems David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> - 2021-03-04 23:50 +0100
Re: PARTIAL DIAGNOSIS of Installation problems Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2021-03-05 13:20 +0100
Re: PARTIAL DIAGNOSIS of Installation problems David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> - 2021-03-05 21:30 +0100
Re: PARTIAL DIAGNOSIS of Installation problems Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2021-03-05 22:20 +0100
Re: PARTIAL DIAGNOSIS of Installation problems Joe <joe@jretrading.com> - 2021-03-05 22:50 +0100
Re: PARTIAL DIAGNOSIS of Installation problems Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2021-03-05 23:30 +0100
Re: PARTIAL DIAGNOSIS of Installation problems Charles Curley <charlescurley@charlescurley.com> - 2021-03-06 00:40 +0100
Re: PARTIAL DIAGNOSIS of Installation problems Celejar <celejar@gmail.com> - 2021-03-07 01:40 +0100
Re: PARTIAL DIAGNOSIS of Installation problems David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2021-03-06 02:50 +0100
Status update {Re: PARTIAL DIAGNOSIS of Installation problems} Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2021-03-08 13:10 +0100
Re: Status update {Re: PARTIAL DIAGNOSIS of Installation problems} "Andrew M.A. Cater" <amacater@einval.com> - 2021-03-08 13:30 +0100
Re: Status update {Re: PARTIAL DIAGNOSIS of Installation problems} songbird <songbird@anthive.com> - 2021-03-08 17:30 +0100
Re: Status update {Re: PARTIAL DIAGNOSIS of Installation problems} Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2021-03-08 20:20 +0100
Re: Status update {Re: PARTIAL DIAGNOSIS of Installation problems} songbird <songbird@anthive.com> - 2021-03-09 02:10 +0100
Re: Status update {Re: PARTIAL DIAGNOSIS of Installation problems} Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2021-03-09 13:40 +0100
Re: Status update {Re: PARTIAL DIAGNOSIS of Installation problems} Anssi Saari <as@sci.fi> - 2021-03-09 14:00 +0100
Re: Status update {Re: PARTIAL DIAGNOSIS of Installation problems} Joe <joe@jretrading.com> - 2021-03-09 14:20 +0100
Re: Status update {Re: PARTIAL DIAGNOSIS of Installation problems} Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2021-03-09 14:10 +0100
Re: Status update {Re: PARTIAL DIAGNOSIS of Installation problems} Joe <joe@jretrading.com> - 2021-03-09 14:20 +0100
Re: Status update {Re: PARTIAL DIAGNOSIS of Installation problems} Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2021-03-09 21:40 +0100
Re: Status update {Re: PARTIAL DIAGNOSIS of Installation problems} Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2021-03-10 10:50 +0100
Re: Status update {Re: PARTIAL DIAGNOSIS of Installation problems} Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2021-03-10 11:30 +0100
Re: Status update {Re: PARTIAL DIAGNOSIS of Installation problems} Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2021-03-10 14:40 +0100
Re: Status update {Re: PARTIAL DIAGNOSIS of Installation problems} Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2021-03-10 15:50 +0100
Re: Status update {Re: PARTIAL DIAGNOSIS of Installation problems} Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2021-03-10 21:50 +0100
Re: Status update {Re: PARTIAL DIAGNOSIS of Installation problems} "Andrew M.A. Cater" <amacater@einval.com> - 2021-03-11 00:20 +0100
Page 2 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 Next page →
| From | Keith Bainbridge <ke1thozgroups@gmx.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-03-02 23:50 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <BOm02-Y5-13@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #232279 |
On 3/3/21 07:31, Brian wrote: > Just write the ISO there with dd +1 I proved my back-up worked one day by dd of=sda ignore cp in this scenario, PLEASE. -- Keith Bainbridge ke1thozgroups@gmx.com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-03-03 03:50 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <BOpKi-3df-5@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #232286 |
On Tue 02 Mar 2021 at 15:42:27 (-0600), Richard Owlett wrote: > On 03/02/2021 02:31 PM, Brian wrote: > > On Tue 02 Mar 2021 at 14:09:18 -0600, Richard Owlett wrote: > > > > > I've one fine machine running i386 flavor of Debian 9.13 . > > > I've wish to install 64 bit flavor on a second machine. > > > debian-10.8.0-amd64-netinst.iso was successfully downloaded & saved. > > > > > > I've a couple of 8GB flash drives which have served as installation media in > > > past. IIRC I could use gparted to wipe them before using dd to copy the iso > > > to the entire device. > > > > You do not need gparted to wipe them. Just write the ISO there with dd > > or cp. > > DUH! > I now have a minimal system installed. > I had forgotten that the installer doesn't recognize the USB device > T-Mobile provides to connect to the cell network. They sell it as a > WiFi Hotspot but I use it essentially as an old fashioned modem. I > usually do installs from DVD1 of the set. After an install everything > "Just works" ;/ > > Any one know exactly what I need to add that would normally just be > silently installed. I just took it as part of "universal" in USB. Have you used your other system with that same device? If so, it will presumably have the necessary firmware installed on it. Just install the same packages; you might even have copies of them already if you cache your downloads. (They should be Architecture: all.) On Wed 03 Mar 2021 at 09:47:02 (+1100), Keith Bainbridge wrote: > On 3/3/21 07:31, Brian wrote: > > Just write the ISO there with dd > > +1 I proved my back-up worked one day by dd of=sda > > ignore cp in this scenario, PLEASE. I don't know about anyone else, but I've got in the habit of typing: # fdisk -l /dev/sdX then ↑ to recall the line, overtyping it to read: # dd bs=512 of=/dev/sdX before finally adding if=… to the end of the line. It seems to make mistakes less likely to happen. (Add sudo to taste.) Cheers, David.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-03-03 10:50 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <BOwiK-7e4-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #232299 |
On 03/02/2021 08:39 PM, David Wright wrote: > On Tue 02 Mar 2021 at 15:42:27 (-0600), Richard Owlett wrote: >> On 03/02/2021 02:31 PM, Brian wrote: >>> On Tue 02 Mar 2021 at 14:09:18 -0600, Richard Owlett wrote: >>> >>>> I've one fine machine running i386 flavor of Debian 9.13 . >>>> I've wish to install 64 bit flavor on a second machine. >>>> debian-10.8.0-amd64-netinst.iso was successfully downloaded & saved. >>>> >>>> I've a couple of 8GB flash drives which have served as installation media in >>>> past. IIRC I could use gparted to wipe them before using dd to copy the iso >>>> to the entire device. >>> >>> You do not need gparted to wipe them. Just write the ISO there with dd >>> or cp. >> >> DUH! >> I now have a minimal system installed. >> I had forgotten that the installer doesn't recognize the USB device >> T-Mobile provides to connect to the cell network. They sell it as a >> WiFi Hotspot but I use it essentially as an old fashioned modem. I >> usually do installs from DVD1 of the set. After an install everything >> "Just works" ;/ >> >> Any one know exactly what I need to add that would normally just be >> silently installed. I just took it as part of "universal" in USB. > > Have you used your other system with that same device? Yes. > If so, it will presumably have the necessary firmware installed on it. > Just install the same packages; you might even have copies of them > already if you cache your downloads. (They should be Architecture: all.) > [snip] Cache wouldn't help as working system is Debian 9.13 and target is 10.8. I suspect only firmware in question is "firmware-linux-free". I will read the apt related man pages to find out how to determine if it is already on the minimal system.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-03-03 11:20 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <BOwLL-7Db-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #232303 |
On 03/03/2021 03:41 AM, Richard Owlett wrote: > On 03/02/2021 08:39 PM, David Wright wrote: >> On Tue 02 Mar 2021 at 15:42:27 (-0600), Richard Owlett wrote: >>> On 03/02/2021 02:31 PM, Brian wrote: >>>> On Tue 02 Mar 2021 at 14:09:18 -0600, Richard Owlett wrote: >>>> >>>>> I've one fine machine running i386 flavor of Debian 9.13 . >>>>> I've wish to install 64 bit flavor on a second machine. >>>>> debian-10.8.0-amd64-netinst.iso was successfully downloaded & saved. >>>>> >>>>> I've a couple of 8GB flash drives which have served as installation >>>>> media in >>>>> past. IIRC I could use gparted to wipe them before using dd to copy >>>>> the iso >>>>> to the entire device. >>>> >>>> You do not need gparted to wipe them. Just write the ISO there with dd >>>> or cp. >>> >>> DUH! >>> I now have a minimal system installed. >>> I had forgotten that the installer doesn't recognize the USB device >>> T-Mobile provides to connect to the cell network. They sell it as a >>> WiFi Hotspot but I use it essentially as an old fashioned modem. I >>> usually do installs from DVD1 of the set. After an install everything >>> "Just works" ;/ >>> >>> Any one know exactly what I need to add that would normally just be >>> silently installed. I just took it as part of "universal" in USB. >> >> Have you used your other system with that same device? > > Yes. > >> If so, it will presumably have the necessary firmware installed on it. >> Just install the same packages; you might even have copies of them >> already if you cache your downloads. (They should be Architecture: all.) >> [snip] > Cache wouldn't help as working system is Debian 9.13 and target is 10.8. > > I suspect only firmware in question is "firmware-linux-free". > I will read the apt related man pages to find out how to determine if it > is already on the minimal system. > It is shown as installed by "dpkg-query -l firmware-linux-free".
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Bainbridge <ke1thozgroups@gmx.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-03-03 00:00 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <BOm9I-11m-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #232279 |
On 3/3/21 07:31, Brian wrote: > Just write the ISO there with dd +1 I proved my back-up worked one day by dd of=/dev/sda maybe ignore cp in this scenario, PLEASE. -- Keith Bainbridge ke1thozgroups@gmx.com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-03-03 16:30 +0100 |
| Subject | PARTIAL DIAGNOSIS of Installation problems |
| Message-ID | <BOBBM-25k-9@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #232278 |
I've one fine machine running i386 flavor of Debian 9.13 .
I've wish to install 64 bit flavor on a second machine.
debian-10.8.0-amd64-netinst.iso was successfully downloaded & saved.
It was copied to a USB flash drive and installation attempted.
Only did minimal install as I could not connect to internet.
To eliminate possibility that second was itself defective I attempted a
multi-boot install to the first machine [Dell Latitude E6410].
Essentially same result :{
Connection to internet is via a T-Mobile Alcatel Linkzone Hotspot.
The WiFi connectivity programmatically disabled (i.e. it is effectively
just a modem).
It is detected by lsusb as:
Bus 002 Device 008: ID 1bbb:0195 T & A Mobile Phones
No non-free driver is needed as none are on the working system.
I attempted to configure the ethernet device with the numeric URL the
working machine uses when configuring it. The installer was happy until
it tried to connect to a chosen mirror. I tried 3 in the United States
and 1 in Canada. None worked.
As I can boot a working Debian on that machine, all installer logs for
the failed install are conveniently available.
Also I didn't find anything in
https://www.debian.org/releases/stable/amd64/ telling details of how to
set up a "ethernet" device.
What do I do now?
TIA
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-03-03 22:30 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: PARTIAL DIAGNOSIS of Installation problems |
| Message-ID | <BOHea-5Jt-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #232311 |
On 3/3/21 7:22 AM, Richard Owlett wrote:
> I've one fine machine running i386 flavor of Debian 9.13 .
> I've wish to install 64 bit flavor on a second machine.
> debian-10.8.0-amd64-netinst.iso was successfully downloaded & saved.
> It was copied to a USB flash drive and installation attempted.
> Only did minimal install as I could not connect to internet.
>
> To eliminate possibility that second was itself defective I attempted a
> multi-boot install to the first machine [Dell Latitude E6410].
> Essentially same result :{
>
> Connection to internet is via a T-Mobile Alcatel Linkzone Hotspot.
> The WiFi connectivity programmatically disabled (i.e. it is effectively
> just a modem).
> It is detected by lsusb as:
> Bus 002 Device 008: ID 1bbb:0195 T & A Mobile Phones
> No non-free driver is needed as none are on the working system.
>
> I attempted to configure the ethernet device with the numeric URL the
> working machine uses when configuring it. The installer was happy until
> it tried to connect to a chosen mirror. I tried 3 in the United States
> and 1 in Canada. None worked.
>
> As I can boot a working Debian on that machine, all installer logs for
> the failed install are conveniently available.
>
> Also I didn't find anything in
> https://www.debian.org/releases/stable/amd64/ telling details of how to
> set up a "ethernet" device.
>
> What do I do now?
If you have a Windows PC with an Ethernet port, insert the USB modem
into the Windows PC, connect to the Internet, share the Internet
connection to the Ethernet port, and connect the Ethernet port of the
Windows computer to the Ethernet port of the Linux computer.
Or, use the Debian i386 machine instead of a Windows PC.
Or, get Internet service that includes a modem/ gateway with an Ethernet
port. This is probably the best answer in the long run.
David
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-03-03 23:00 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: PARTIAL DIAGNOSIS of Installation problems |
| Message-ID | <BOHHc-5VT-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #232325 |
> Or, get Internet service that includes a modem/ gateway with an Ethernet
> port. This is probably the best answer in the long run.
Unless that modem/gateway is under the control of the ISP, in which case
you're fundamentally inviting your ISP onto your local network, IOW into
your private home.
[ Tho, of course, you can probably arrange to confine that "local
network" such that it's only connected to a single other machine which
you do control and which you use as your own local router. ]
Stefan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-03-04 02:50 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: PARTIAL DIAGNOSIS of Installation problems |
| Message-ID | <BOLhM-8mE-5@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #232329 |
On 3/3/21 1:53 PM, Stefan Monnier wrote: >> Or, get Internet service that includes a modem/ gateway with an Ethernet >> port. This is probably the best answer in the long run. > > Unless that modem/gateway is under the control of the ISP, in which case > you're fundamentally inviting your ISP onto your local network, IOW into > your private home. > [ Tho, of course, you can probably arrange to confine that "local > network" such that it's only connected to a single other machine which > you do control and which you use as your own local router. ] So, you designed, built, and programmed your "single other machine" using machines that you designed, built, and programmed; which in turn you designed, built, and programmed using machines that you designed, built, and programmed; etc.; all sourced from raw materials? David
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-03-04 03:50 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: PARTIAL DIAGNOSIS of Installation problems |
| Message-ID | <BOMdP-tI-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #232334 |
>>> Or, get Internet service that includes a modem/ gateway with an Ethernet
>>> port. This is probably the best answer in the long run.
>> Unless that modem/gateway is under the control of the ISP, in which case
>> you're fundamentally inviting your ISP onto your local network, IOW into
>> your private home.
>> [ Tho, of course, you can probably arrange to confine that "local
>> network" such that it's only connected to a single other machine which
>> you do control and which you use as your own local router. ]
> So, you designed, built, and programmed your "single other machine" using
> machines that you designed, built, and programmed; which in turn you
> designed, built, and programmed using machines that you designed, built, and
> programmed; etc.; all sourced from raw materials?
I didn't say "built by the ISP" but "under the control of the ISP".
IOW "who can administer".
Of course, there can also be issues of trust about the underlying
software, hardware or what not, but if the ISP has administrative
access then there's no need to dig any further.
Stefan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-03-04 04:20 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: PARTIAL DIAGNOSIS of Installation problems |
| Message-ID | <BOMGR-Yk-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #232335 |
On 3/3/21 6:43 PM, Stefan Monnier wrote: >>>> Or, get Internet service that includes a modem/ gateway with an Ethernet >>>> port. This is probably the best answer in the long run. >>> Unless that modem/gateway is under the control of the ISP, in which case >>> you're fundamentally inviting your ISP onto your local network, IOW into >>> your private home. >>> [ Tho, of course, you can probably arrange to confine that "local >>> network" such that it's only connected to a single other machine which >>> you do control and which you use as your own local router. ] >> So, you designed, built, and programmed your "single other machine" using >> machines that you designed, built, and programmed; which in turn you >> designed, built, and programmed using machines that you designed, built, and >> programmed; etc.; all sourced from raw materials? > > I didn't say "built by the ISP" but "under the control of the ISP". > > IOW "who can administer". > > Of course, there can also be issues of trust about the underlying > software, hardware or what not, but if the ISP has administrative > access then there's no need to dig any further. https://users.ece.cmu.edu/~ganger/712.fall02/papers/p761-thompson.pdf David
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-03-04 05:10 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: PARTIAL DIAGNOSIS of Installation problems |
| Message-ID | <BONtf-1tS-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #232336 |
> https://users.ece.cmu.edu/~ganger/712.fall02/papers/p761-thompson.pdf
Not sure how this is relevant. This is like talking about the security
of locks when the other guy is openly telling you he has a copy of
the key.
Stefan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | <tomas@tuxteam.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-03-04 10:00 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: PARTIAL DIAGNOSIS of Installation problems |
| Message-ID | <BORZU-42I-13@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #232338 |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
On Wed, Mar 03, 2021 at 11:08:40PM -0500, Stefan Monnier wrote: > > https://users.ece.cmu.edu/~ganger/712.fall02/papers/p761-thompson.pdf > > Not sure how this is relevant. This is like talking about the security > of locks when the other guy is openly telling you he has a copy of > the key. :-) Once I read this metaphor (I can't remember where; something tells me that it was Bruce Schneier, but I can't find it) of securing your house by ramming a two-by-four [1] into the earth in your front yard and hoping the burglar hits his head against it. Cheers [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:2_By_4_Clue_Stick.jpg - t
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | <tomas@tuxteam.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-03-04 09:50 +0100 |
| Subject | Trusting trust [was: PARTIAL DIAGNOSIS of Installation problems] |
| Message-ID | <BORQd-3YF-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #232334 |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
On Wed, Mar 03, 2021 at 05:42:36PM -0800, David Christensen wrote:
[...]
> So, you designed, built, and programmed your "single other machine"
> using machines that you designed, built [...]
This is disingenuous.
The whole game is about trust. I trust gcc more than I trust MSVC.
That may be a good bet or a bad bet, as trust always is. I trust
Debian more than I trust, let's say, Salesforce.
I trust Debian: do you think I can vet the ~2070 packages that are
currently installed on my personal box?
Thompson's "on trusting trust" is just a bad joke when put in that
perspective.
I am well aware of the importance of Thompson's paper, mind you. It
was seminal in showing the importance of the build chain. NixOS and
Guix wouldn't be without that perspective. It has been demonstrated
practically a couple of times since then (MSVC, npm, etc.).
The one aspect missing is, though, the "social" aspect: the software
endeavour has become so devilishly complex that the idea of One
Person (TM) checking everything down to some hypothetical "Trust
Roots" is... theoretical, to state it politely. You gotta delegate
some trust (well, most of it, actually).
And oh, do you a favour and dare a step forward from the 1984s.
Read David A. Wheeler's work [1] and put yourself in the 2010s :-)
Back to the topic: I do trust my ISP significantly less than I do
OpenWRT. Therefore there is something between their provided router
and my home network.
Cheers
[1] https://dwheeler.com/trusting-trust/
https://arxiv.org/abs/1004.5534
- t
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Joe <joe@jretrading.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-03-04 10:50 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Trusting trust [was: PARTIAL DIAGNOSIS of Installation problems] |
| Message-ID | <BOSMh-4zZ-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #232340 |
On Thu, 4 Mar 2021 09:43:57 +0100 <tomas@tuxteam.de> wrote: > On Wed, Mar 03, 2021 at 05:42:36PM -0800, David Christensen wrote: > > [...] > > > So, you designed, built, and programmed your "single other machine" > > using machines that you designed, built [...] > > This is disingenuous. > > The whole game is about trust. I trust gcc more than I trust MSVC. Undoubtedly. But there is also no doubt that gcc and every other serious compiler in the West has been compromised. Why would they *not* be? > The one aspect missing is, though, the "social" aspect: the software > endeavour has become so devilishly complex that the idea of One > Person (TM) checking everything down to some hypothetical "Trust > Roots" is... theoretical, to state it politely. You gotta delegate > some trust (well, most of it, actually). Indeed. The new heartbeat/data return function in OpenSSL, itself the core of much Open Source security, was suggested by the programmer himself, and the resulting code was audited by *one* other person before approval and distribution. What could possibly go wrong? > > And oh, do you a favour and dare a step forward from the 1984s. > Read David A. Wheeler's work [1] and put yourself in the 2010s :-) > > Back to the topic: I do trust my ISP significantly less than I do > OpenWRT. Therefore there is something between their provided router > and my home network. Of course. Any externally-supplied network device is inherently untrusted. It is unwise to give any IoT device access to your network, it is fail-safe to assume that every such device reports back as much as possible to some Chinese company. But most people do unwise things frequently, as most of us are unwise in many areas. We just happen to know a bit about networking. -- Joe
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | <tomas@tuxteam.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-03-04 14:20 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Trusting trust [was: PARTIAL DIAGNOSIS of Installation problems] |
| Message-ID | <BOW3v-6Mm-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #232345 |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
On Thu, Mar 04, 2021 at 08:10:45AM -0500, Celejar wrote: > On Thu, 4 Mar 2021 09:41:13 +0000 > Joe <joe@jretrading.com> wrote: > > ... > > > Undoubtedly. But there is also no doubt that gcc and every other > > serious compiler in the West has been compromised. Why would they *not* > > be? > > Do you have any evidence for this, or is it just your assumption, > because "why would they not be?" You mean GCC specifically or some examples of build chain attacks in general? Because in the second case there are some nice specimens out there. Cheers - t
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Celejar <celejar@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-03-04 15:30 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Trusting trust [was: PARTIAL DIAGNOSIS of Installation problems] |
| Message-ID | <BOX9f-7nW-5@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #232351 |
On Thu, 4 Mar 2021 14:17:59 +0100 <tomas@tuxteam.de> wrote: > On Thu, Mar 04, 2021 at 08:10:45AM -0500, Celejar wrote: > > On Thu, 4 Mar 2021 09:41:13 +0000 > > Joe <joe@jretrading.com> wrote: > > > > ... > > > > > Undoubtedly. But there is also no doubt that gcc and every other > > > serious compiler in the West has been compromised. Why would they *not* > > > be? > > > > Do you have any evidence for this, or is it just your assumption, > > because "why would they not be?" > > You mean GCC specifically or some examples of build chain attacks > in general? Because in the second case there are some nice specimens > out there. I'm interested in anything, although my comment was focused particularly on things as critical, fundamental, and ubiquitous as GCC and "every other serious compiler." Celejar
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | tomas@tuxteam.de |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-03-04 16:20 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Trusting trust [was: PARTIAL DIAGNOSIS of Installation problems] |
| Message-ID | <BOXVE-7Tw-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #232355 |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
On Thu, Mar 04, 2021 at 09:21:46AM -0500, Celejar wrote: > On Thu, 4 Mar 2021 14:17:59 +0100 > <tomas@tuxteam.de> wrote: > > > On Thu, Mar 04, 2021 at 08:10:45AM -0500, Celejar wrote: > > > On Thu, 4 Mar 2021 09:41:13 +0000 > > > Joe <joe@jretrading.com> wrote: > > > > > > ... > > > > > > > Undoubtedly. But there is also no doubt that gcc and every other > > > > serious compiler in the West has been compromised. Why would they *not* > > > > be? > > > > > > Do you have any evidence for this, or is it just your assumption, > > > because "why would they not be?" > > > > You mean GCC specifically or some examples of build chain attacks > > in general? Because in the second case there are some nice specimens > > out there. > > I'm interested in anything, although my comment was focused > particularly on things as critical, fundamental, and ubiquitous as GCC > and "every other serious compiler." Two off the top of my head - Sometime 2017 [1], Microsoft put out a version of Visual Studio which baked "phone home" functionality into its compiled "products". Make no mistake: it phoned Microsoft. Imagine you compile an application for your customer, and this app phones... Microsoft. Some hilarity ensued. They said "oh, sorry. It wasn't with bad intentions" and reverted it. I call this pattern "Emergent Evil". - NPM buildchain attacks are more and more frequent. Just publish a package out there and wait until someone takes the bait. An especially nice one was the event-stream [2] episode, where the malicious code only injected malicious code (yes, really) when it noticed that it was "in" the right build environment. Nice read. I'm sure this ain't the only one in this context. Note that I'm no specialist. Otherwise the top of my head would be heavier ;-) Cheers [1] https://www.reddit.com/r/cpp/comments/4ibauu/visual_studio_adding_telemetry_function_calls_to/ [2] https://lwn.net/Articles/773121/ - t
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Celejar <celejar@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-03-04 17:20 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Trusting trust [was: PARTIAL DIAGNOSIS of Installation problems] |
| Message-ID | <BOYRH-cF-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #232358 |
On Thu, 4 Mar 2021 16:14:08 +0100 tomas@tuxteam.de wrote: > On Thu, Mar 04, 2021 at 09:21:46AM -0500, Celejar wrote: > > On Thu, 4 Mar 2021 14:17:59 +0100 > > <tomas@tuxteam.de> wrote: > > > > > On Thu, Mar 04, 2021 at 08:10:45AM -0500, Celejar wrote: > > > > On Thu, 4 Mar 2021 09:41:13 +0000 > > > > Joe <joe@jretrading.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > ... > > > > > > > > > Undoubtedly. But there is also no doubt that gcc and every other > > > > > serious compiler in the West has been compromised. Why would they *not* > > > > > be? > > > > > > > > Do you have any evidence for this, or is it just your assumption, > > > > because "why would they not be?" > > > > > > You mean GCC specifically or some examples of build chain attacks > > > in general? Because in the second case there are some nice specimens > > > out there. > > > > I'm interested in anything, although my comment was focused > > particularly on things as critical, fundamental, and ubiquitous as GCC > > and "every other serious compiler." > > Two off the top of my head > > - Sometime 2017 [1], Microsoft put out a version of Visual Studio > which baked "phone home" functionality into its compiled "products". > Make no mistake: it phoned Microsoft. Imagine you compile an > application for your customer, and this app phones... Microsoft. > > Some hilarity ensued. They said "oh, sorry. It wasn't with bad > intentions" and reverted it. > > I call this pattern "Emergent Evil". Outrageous, certainly - this sort of thing is one of the reasons I use linux and avoid Microsoft products to the extent I find practical. But I don't consider this a "build-chain attack." > - NPM buildchain attacks are more and more frequent. Just publish > a package out there and wait until someone takes the bait. > An especially nice one was the event-stream [2] episode, where > the malicious code only injected malicious code (yes, really) > when it noticed that it was "in" the right build environment. > Nice read. I'm sure this ain't the only one in this context. Agreed - this sort of thing is scary. I know I can't avoid the risk entirely, but this is one of the reasons I try hard to limit my use of software to stuff in the repos. I understand it's no magic bullet against this type of thing, but in my (not very informed) judgment, it's less likely to happen to stuff that Debian is vetting. I.e., I'm hoping that all those hoops that Debian makes packages jump through, which prevent stuff I do want from entering the repos, will work here in my favor ;) > Note that I'm no specialist. Otherwise the top of my head would > be heavier ;-) > > Cheers > > [1] https://www.reddit.com/r/cpp/comments/4ibauu/visual_studio_adding_telemetry_function_calls_to/ > [2] https://lwn.net/Articles/773121/ Celejar
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | tomas@tuxteam.de |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-03-04 19:10 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Trusting trust [was: PARTIAL DIAGNOSIS of Installation problems] |
| Message-ID | <BP0Aa-1lt-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #232359 |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
On Thu, Mar 04, 2021 at 11:16:25AM -0500, Celejar wrote: [...] > > - Sometime 2017 [1], Microsoft put out a version of Visual Studio > > which baked "phone home" functionality into its compiled "products". [...] > > I call this pattern "Emergent Evil". > > Outrageous, certainly - this sort of thing is one of the reasons I > use linux and avoid Microsoft products to the extent I find practical. > But I don't consider this a "build-chain attack." Well, it's the compiler injecting unexpected functionality into the compilee -- i.e. half to three quarters Thompson. The part that I find more interesting is the "emergent evil" thing. Somehow the techies found that it is OK to do that and they did, in the best of their intentions. They are not the evil ones. I don't think some manager up the ladder told them to do it. It must be the whole corporate culture, i.e. some kind of emergent behaviour. At the end, trust is a social thing. I trust Debian, because. > > - NPM buildchain attacks [...] > Agreed - this sort of thing is scary. the one example I provided is special, because it was extremely refined: someone taking over an orphaned npm package, and laser-targeting one product's build chain. > I know I can't avoid the risk > entirely, but this is one of the reasons I try hard to limit my use of > software to stuff in the repos. I understand it's no magic bullet > against this type of thing, but in my (not very informed) judgment, it's > less likely to happen to stuff that Debian is vetting. I.e., I'm hoping > that all those hoops that Debian makes packages jump through, which > prevent stuff I do want from entering the repos, will work here in my > favor ;) That's my approach, too; but I realise that trust is, at the bottom, a social thing. Technology can only be a tool in this. The "classical" distro way is becoming more and more difficult; for "monsters" like Chrome, the distribution can't vet everything, and as software becomes more and more entangled (with version dependencies on the newest micro-version), people resort more and more to docker images, flatpaks and what have you. Cheers - t
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 2 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.user
csiph-web