Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:BTRFS is getting there (Score 1) 269

What? FreeBSD supports master-master(only one drive writes at a time per blockdevice, which is negotiated) shared physical HDs over SAS. You just need a high speed link between the two masters and FreeBSD figured out the current master at the CAM layer allowing for it to work with all filesystems. ZFS is nice in that you can simply do asynchronous constant ZFS replication to a remote pool. Not real back-up, since data lost will replace the loss to the remote machine.

Comment Re:what about git? (Score 1) 74

even if you can manufacture a hash collision, there really isn't a good way to use it to attack a (remote) git repository.

If you have $150k to drop on creating a hash-collision, you can afford someone to hack the remote system. Most systems are not properly secured.

Even then, if someone has a "clean" copy of the file you're colliding with, makes a modification to that and re-commits, your malicious file will be overwritten wholesale by the new version of the non-malicious file

Same could be said about the malicious file.

Comment Re:what does that even mean? (Score 1) 143

What are you talking about? You can get wifi amps that are certified a/b/g/n/ac compatible. And quite high wattage. They're meant for long distance directional antenna, but there is nothing stopping you from plugging that coax into a regular antenna. And MIMO is only common for recent hardware, a lot of people still use very old hardware.

Comment Re:Why not just lock down the radio portion? (Score 2) 143

One of their main concerns is an out of spec antenna power. There is nothing stopping a SoC from having a hardware limit on the power output. There is also nothing stopping someone from hooking up an AMP and relaying the signal a much higher power. Of course anyone trying to disrupt wireless signals can easily do so. What the FCC wants to stop is the ability for the home user to change their router to run out of spec. some opensource projects open up the ability for the end user to select much higher signal strengths. Since they can't run a law stopping opensource from doing this, they want to write a law to stop router manufactures from allowing opensource to work on their devices.

Comment Re:Why not just lock down the radio portion? (Score 1) 143

Actually, they do want to mess with the firmware. Much of the research on improving wifi is being done by Universities or private individuals modifying the firmware. Of course the amp could be closed source, but the rest of the radio shouldn't be locked down. Eric had an example were a widely popular, but later unsupported wifi router had a bug in the protocol that got trigger regularly after support was done. This bug could cause the router to spam broadcast announcement packets and lock down most of the spectrum. The only reason it got fixed is because of opensource. Of course the average user probably would not have gotten the opensource fix, but it is an example where fix was made available.

Comment Re:BTRFS is getting there (Score 1) 269

That's why I said "RAID6(3 disk)". I have a cousin that has been a guest speaker for several national talks about how to properly setup your storage, and he managed a 10PiB logical datastore for nearly a decade using RAID6(RAIDZ3) and never had to go to backup. Your servers should be setup in a way that a single controller does not take down the array. Even better is you can setup a master-master/slave shared SAS plane, so if one file-server dies, the slave picks up. Yes, you can allow multiple computers to directly share the same physical harddrives, FreeBSD supports that. It's file system agnostic and works transparently.

Comment Re:Documentation is rarely valued as a contributio (Score 1) 688

I use my visual center while programming, but most of what I call programming is thinking about the problem. When I'm coding, I'm not sure what I'm using. I cannot walk and discuss difficult problems because I will lose track of what is around me, sometimes even lose my balance as I model the problem visually in my head.

At least one time when I was going for a walk with my co-worker, we were discussing something very interesting to me and I nearly fell over because my visual orientation while shuffling stuff around in my head did not play well with my orientation in the real world. I had to suddenly stop walking and purposely focus on something in front of me to quickly regain my balance.

Another time I was sitting at my desk when I had a sudden moment of brilliance when working on designing a difficult system for nearly two weeks. When that happen, I had a huge rush of ideas that suddenly fell into place, causing my visual model to quickly take shape, during which time I noticed my actual vision started to tunnel, and I could not see anything outside of the center of my vision, and then I started to see sparkles. As soon as the moment was over, my vision returned to normal. I was mentally drained for the rest of the day.

Comment Re:BTRFS is getting there (Score 1) 269

RAID isn't backup, but your backup devices may be using RAID, and increasing the MTBF of your backup device is a worthy cause. The main benefit of RAID10 is IOPS. I would argue that using any FS that doesn't have checksumming is useless. If you don't know your data is good, what point is there?

The main point is a small difference in investment gives a huge difference in benefit.

Comment Re:BTRFS is getting there (Score 1) 269

RAID5 increases the chance of needing to go to backup. What if your backup device is also using RAID5? Now you've increased your chance of going to a secondary backup. The difference between RAID5 and RAID6(3 disk) can be the difference between rarely going to backup and never going to backup in your lifetime.

"Of course power tools and alcohol don't mix. Everyone knows power tools aren't soluble in alcohol..." -- Crazy Nigel