Nope. That's why I changed all my players to BlueOS.
I replaced all my SONOS connects with BlueSound node Nano devices. A pricey replacement, but worth it.
As a bonus I was now able to turn off SMB1 on my home Samba server !
No. This hate of coddling just makes the ptsd worse. It's easy to sit in judgement, but hard to fix. Why aren't people dinging the employers for not proactively offering this training? Why are we letting them off so easily?
> Every large NAS vendor (Synology, QNAP, etc) has their own SMB server they wrote themserlves
That's untrue. Both Synology and QNAP use Samba. QNAP contributes code and bugfixes back to samba.org (Hi Jones !).
A few nits: He worked at CSRG which produced BSD, Berkeley Software Distribution. It wasn't the BSD movement, but the efforts to rewrite Unix to get rid of AT&T IP was started at CSRG after 4.3BSD was released, and Mike did a lot of work there. 2BSD did run on the PDP-11s, and 2.11BSD was the best release to run on larger PDP-11s. 3B2s never had BSD support: it was pure System Vr2 and later from AT&T (with a BSD networking stack ported later). Lately he had also been contributing a lot to FreeBSD and was going to be release engineer for our next release 13.4.
Unless you were at Krik McKusick's house, you never saw 4.5BSD
Kirk, author of UFS and manager of CSRG for a time, has a listing on his bookshelf that's labeled "4.5BSD." However, it really really is a snapshot between 4BSD and what would become 4.1BSD. CSRG's follow on release to 4BSD was going to be 5BSD and this listing was half way to that. AT&T asked them not to do that (after this listing was produced and labeled), so they went with 4.1BSD for reasons to extensive to go into here. I'm sure Kirk keeps it as a conversation piece
CSRG, the computer group at Berkeley enhanced AT&T's 7th Edition Unix under contract to DARPA to make it faster and add networking. They distributed the results as the Berkeley Software Distribution. Mike was the release engineer for several of these releases, first on the PDP-11 (for 2.9BSD) and later for 4.3BSD, the interim releases and 4.4BSD. Most recently, he'd accepted the role of being release engineer for the next FreeBSD release (13.4) and was also active in improving Raspberry Pi5 support as well as all the low level moving parts of getting FreeBSD running on the M1 and friends. His whole career is too long to mention here.
He was an absolute joy. I always loved seeing him at different conferences, most recently at BSDcan 2024 just last week. I talked with him about a number of things, had dinner with him and hung out with him for a while at the after social party. I'm still in shock that he's gone.
The upstream Linux kernel doesn't differentiate between security bugs and "normal" bug fixes. So the new kernel.org CNA just assigns CVE's to all fixes. They don't score them.
Look at the numbers from the whitepaper:
"In March 2024 there were 270 new CVEs created for the stable Linux kernel. So far in April 2024 there are 342 new CVEs:"
Yes ! That's exactly the point. Trying to curate and select patches for a "frozen" kernel fails due to the firehose of fixes going in upstream.
And in the kernel many of these could be security bugs. No one is doing evaluation on that, there are simply too many fixes in such a complex code base to check.
Oh that's really sad. I hope they use a more up to date version of Samba
BLISS is ignorance.
