Skip to main content

External Blogs

Montréal-Python 66: Call For Speakers

Montreal Python - mer, 09/20/2017 - 23:00

It's back-to-everything and Montreal-Python is no exception! We are looking for speakers for our first meetup of fall.

We are looking for speakers that want to give a regular presentation (20 to 25 minutes) or a lightning talk (5 minutes).

Submit your proposal at


October 2nd, 2017 at 6PM



PyCon Canada Early Bird Tickets

Also, a little reminder that Early Bird tickets for PyCon Canada (which will be held in Montreal on November 18th to 21st) are now available at

The early bird rates are only for a limited quantity of tickets, so get yours soon!

PyCon Canada Sponsorship

Would you like to become a sponsor for PyCon Canada? Send an email to

Catégories: External Blogs

My free software activities, August 2017

Anarcat - sam, 09/02/2017 - 15:16
Debian Long Term Support (LTS)

This is my monthly Debian LTS report. This month I worked on a few major packages that took a long time instead of multiple smaller issues. Affected packages were Mercurial, libdbd-mysql-perl and Ruby.

Mercurial updates

Mercurial was vulnerable to two CVEs: CVE-2017-1000116 (command injection on clients through malicious ssh URLs) and CVE-2017-1000115 (path traversal via symlink). The former is an issue that actually affects many other similar software like Git (CVE-2017-1000117), Subversion (CVE-2017-9800) and even CVS (CVE-2017-12836). The latter symlink issue is a distinct issue that came up during an internal audit.

The fix, shipped as DLA-1072-1, involved a rather difficult backport, especially because the Mercurial test suite takes a long time to complete. This reminded me of the virtues of DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS=parallel=4, which sped up the builds considerably. I also discovered that the Wheezy build chain doesn't support sbuild's --source-only-changes flag which I had hardcoded in my sbuild.conf file. This seems to be simply because sbuild passes --build=source to dpkg-buildpackage, an option that is supported only in jessie or later.


I have worked on fixing two issues with the libdbd-mysql-perl package, CVE-2017-10788 and CVE-2017-10789, which resulted in the DLA-1079-1 upload. Behind this mysteriously named package sits a critical piece of infrastructure, namely the mysql commandline client which is probably used and abused by hundreds if not thousands of home-made scripts, but also all of Perl's MySQL support, which is probably used by even a larger base of software.

Through the Debian bug reports (Debian bug #866818 and Debian bug #866821), I have learned that the patches existed in the upstream tracker but were either ignored or even reverted in the latest 4.043 upstream release. It turns out that there are talks of forking that library because of maintainership issue. It blows my mind that such an important part of MySQL is basically unmaintained.

I ended up backporting the upstream patches, which was also somewhat difficult because of the long-standing issues with SSL support in MySQL. The backport there was particularly hard to test, as you need to run that test suite by hand, twice: once with a server configured with a (valid!) SSL certificate and one without (!). I'm wondering how much time it is really worth spending on trying to fix SSL in MySQL, however. It has been badly broken forever, and while the patch is an improvement, I would actually still never trust SSL transports in MySQL over an untrusted network. The few people that I know use such transports wrap their connections around a simpler stunnel instead.

The other issue was easier to fix so I submitted a pull request upstream to make sure that work isn't lost, although it is not clear what the future of that patch (or project!) will be at this point.


I also worked on the rubygems issues, which, thanks to the "vendoring" practice of the Ruby community, also affects the ruby1.9 package. 4 distinct CVEs were triaged here (CVE-2017-0899, CVE-2017-0900, CVE-2017-0901 and CVE-2017-0902) and I determined the latter issue didn't affect wheezy as rubygems doesn't do its own DNS resolution there (later versions lookup SRV records).

This is another package where the test suite takes a long time to run. Worse, the packages in Wheezy actually fails to build from source: the test suites just fail in various steps, particularly because of dh key too small errors for Rubygems, but also other errors for Ruby. I also had trouble backporting one test which I had to simply skip for Rubygems. I uploaded and announced test packages and hopefully I'll be able to complete this work soon, although I would certainly appreciate any help on this...


I took a look at the sox, libvorbis and exiv2 issues. None had fixes available. sox and exiv2 were basically a list of fuzzing issues, which are often minor or at least of unknown severity. Those would have required a significant amount of work and I figured I would prioritize other work first.

I also triaged CVE-2017-7506, which doesn't seem to affect the spice package in wheezy, after doing a fairly thorough audit of the code. The vulnerability is specifically bound to the reds_on_main_agent_monitors_config function, which is simply not present in our older version. A hostile message would fall through the code and not provoke memory allocation or out of bounds access, so I simply marked the wheezy version as not-affected, something which usually happens during the original triage but can also happen during the actual patching work, as in this case.

Other free software work

This describes the volunteer work I do on various free software projects. This month, again, my internal reports show that I spent about the same time on volunteer and paid time, but this is probably a wrong estimate because I spent a lot of time at Debconf which I didn't clock in...


So I participated in the 17th Debian Conference in Montreal. It was great to see (and make!) so many friends from all over the world in person again, and I was happy to work on specific issues together with other Debian developers. I am especially thankful to David Bremner for fixing the syncing of the flagged tag when added to new messages (patch series). This allows me to easily sync the one tag (inbox) that is not statically assigned during notmuch new, by using flagged as a synchronization tool. This allows me to use notmuch more easily across multiple machines without having to sync all tags with dump/restore or using muchsync which wasn't working for me (although a new release came out which may fix my issues). The magic incantation looks something like this:

notmuch tag -inbox tag:inbox and not tag:flagged notmuch tag +inbox not tag:inbox and tag:flagged

However, most of my time in the first week (Debcamp) was spent trying to complete the networking setup: configure switches, setup wiring and so on. I also configured an apt-cacher-ng proxy to serve packages to attendees during the conference. I configured it with Avahi to configure clients automatically, which led me to discover (and fix) issue Debian bug #870321) although there are more issues with the autodiscovery mechanism... I spent extra time to document the (somewhat simple) configuration of such a server in the Debian wiki because it was not the first time I had research that procedure...

I somehow thought this was a great time to upgrade my laptop to stretch. Normally, I keep that device running stable because I don't use it often and I don't want to have major traumatizing upgrades every time I leave with it on a trip. But this time was special: there were literally hundreds of Debian developers to help me out if there was trouble. And there was, of course, trouble as it turns out! I had problems with the fonts on my display, because, well, I had suspended (twice) my laptop during the install. The fix was simply to flush the fontconfig cache, and I tried to document this in the fonts wiki page and my upgrades page.

I also gave a short training called Debian packaging 101 which was pretty successful. Like the short presentation I made at the last Montreal BSP, the workshop was based on my quick debian development guide. I'm thinking of expanding this to a larger audience with a "102" course that would discuss more complex packaging problems. But my secret plan (well, secret until now I guess) is to make packaging procedures more uniform in Debian by training new Debian packagers using that same training for the next 2 decades. But I will probably start by just trying to do this again at the next Debconf, if I can attend.

Debian uploads

I also sponsored two packages during Debconf: one was a "scratch an itch" upload (elpa-ivy) which I requested (Debian bug #863216) as part of a larger effort to ship the Emacs elisp packages as Debian packages. The other was an upload of diceware to build the documentation in a separate package and fix other issues I have found in the package during a review.

I also uploaded a bunch of other fixes to the Debian archive:

Signing keys rotation

I also started the process of moving my main OpenPGP certification key by adding a signing subkey. The subkey is stored in a cryptographic token so I can sign things on more than one machine without storing that critical key on all those devices physically.

Unfortunately, this meant that I need to do some shenanigans when I want to sign content in my Debian work, because the new subkey takes time to propagate to the Debian archive. For example, I have to specify the primary key with a "bang" when signing packages (debsign -k '792152527B75921E!' ...) or use inline signatures in email sent for security announcement (since that trick doesn't work in Mutt or Notmuch). I tried to figure out how to better coordinate this next time by reading up documentation on, but there is no fixed date for key changes on the rsync interface. There are "monthly changes" so one's best bet is to look for the last change in their git repository. and LFS migration

I finally turned off my git repository service by moving the remaining repos to GitLab. Unfortunately, GitLab removed support for git-annex recently, so I had to migrate my repositories to Git-LFS, which was an interesting experience. LFS is pretty easy to use, definitely simpler than git-annex. It also seems to be a good match for the use-case at hand, which is to store large files (videos, namely) as part of slides for presentations.

It turns out that their migration guide could have been made much simpler. I tried to submit those changes to the documentation but couldn't fork the GitLab EE project to make a patch, so I just documented the issue in the original MR for now. While I was there I filed a feature request to add a new reference shortcut (GL-NNN) after noticing a similar token used on GitHub. This would be a useful addition because I often have numbering conflicts between Debian BTS bug numbers and GitLab issues in packages I maintain there. In particular, I have problems using GitLab issue numbers in Monkeysign, because commit logs end up in Debian changelogs and will be detected by the Debian infrastructure even though those are GitLab bug numbers. Using such a shortcut would avoid detection and such a conflict.


I wrote a small tool to extract numeric statistics from a given file. I often do ad-hoc benchmarks where I store a bunch of numbers in a file and then try to make averages and so on. As an exercise in learning NumPy, I figured I would write such a simple tool, called numpy-stats, which probably sounds naive to seasoned Python scientists.

My incentive was that I was trying to figure out what was the distribution of password length in a given password generator scheme. So I wrote this simple script:

for i in seq 10000 ; do shuf -n4 /usr/share/dict/words | tr -d '\n' done > length

And then feed that data in the tool:

$ numpy-stats lengths { "max": 60, "mean": 33.883293722913464, "median": 34.0, "min": 14, "size": 143060, "std": 5.101490225062775 }

I am surprised that there isn't such a tool already: hopefully I am wrong and will just be pointed towards the better alternative in the comments here!

Safe Eyes

I added screensaver support to the new SafeEyes project, which I am considering as a replacement to the workrave project I have been using for years. I really like how the interruptions basically block the whole screen: way more effective than only blocking the keyboard, because all potential distractions go away.

One feature that is missing is keystrokes and mouse movement counting and of course an official Debian package, although the latter would be easy to fix because upstream already has an unofficial build. I am thinking of writing my own little tool to count keystrokes, since the overlap between SafeEyes and such a counter isn't absolutely necessary. This is something that workrave does, but there are "idle time" extensions in Xorg that do not need to count keystrokes. There are already certain tools to count input events, but none seem to do what I want (most of them are basically keyloggers). It would be an interesting test to see if it's possible to write something that would work both for Xorg and Wayland at the same time. Unfortunately, preliminary research show that:

  1. in Xorg, the only way to implement this is to sniff all events, ie. to implement a keylogger

  2. in Wayland, this is completely unsupported. it seems some compositors could implement such a counter, but then it means that this is compositor specific, or, in other words, unportable

So there is little hope here, which brings to my mind "painmeter" as an appropriate name for this future programming nightmare.


I sent my first contribution to the ansible project with a small documentation fix. I had an eye opener recently when I discovered a GitLab ansible prototype that would manipulate GitLab settings. When I first discovered Ansible, I was frustrated by the YAML/Jinja DSL: it felt silly to write all this code in YAML when you are a Python developer. It was great to see reasonably well-written Python code that would do things and delegate the metadata storage (and only that!) to YAML, as opposed to using YAML as a DSL.

So I figured I would look at the Ansible documentation on how this works, but unfortunately, the Ansible documentation is severly lacking in this area. There are broken links (I only fixed one page) and missing pieces. For example, the developing plugins page doesn't explain how to program a plugin at all.

I was told on IRC that: "documentation around developing plugins is sparse in general. the code is the best documentation that exists (right now)". I didn't get a reply when asking which code in particular could provide good examples either. In comparison, Puppet has excellent documentation on how to create custom types, functions and facts. That is definitely a turn-off for a new contributor, but at least my pull request was merged in and I can only hope that seasoned Ansible contributors expand on this critical piece of documentation eventually.


As you can see, I'm all over the place, as usual. GitHub tells me I "Opened 13 other pull requests in 11 repositories" (emphasis mine), which I guess means on top of the "9 commits in 5 repositories" mentioned earlier. My profile probably tells a more detailed story that what would be useful to mention here. I should also mention how difficult it is to write those reports: I basically do a combination of looking into my GitHub and GitLab profiles, the last 30 days of emails and filesystem changes (!!). En vrac, a list of changes which may be of interest:

  • font-large (and its alias, font-small): shortcut to send the right escape sequence to rxvt so it changes its font
  • fix-acer: short script to hardcode the modeline (you remember those?!) for my screen which has a broken EDID pin (so autodetection fails, yay Xorg log files...)
  • ikiwiki-pandoc-quickie: fake ikiwiki renderer that (ab)uses pandoc to generate a HTML file with the right stylesheet to preview Markdown as it may look in this blog (the basic template is missing still)
  • git-annex-transfer: a command I've often been missing in git-annex, which is a way to transfer files between remotes without having to copy them locally (upstream feature request)
  • I linked the graphics of the Debian archive software architecture in the Debian wiki in the hope more people notice it.
  • I did some tweaks on my Taffybar to introduce a battery meter and hoping to have temperature sensors, which mostly failed. there's a pending pull request that may bring some sense into this, hopefully.
  • I made two small patches in Monkeysign to fix gpg.conf handling and multiple email output, a dumb bug I cannot believe anyone noticed or reported just yet. Thanks Valerie for the bug report! The upload of this in Debian is pending a review from the release team.
Catégories: External Blogs

The supposed decline of copyleft

Anarcat - mer, 08/23/2017 - 12:00

At DebConf17, John Sullivan, the executive director of the FSF, gave a talk on the supposed decline of the use of copyleft licenses use free-software projects. In his presentation, Sullivan questioned the notion that permissive licenses, like the BSD or MIT licenses, are gaining ground at the expense of the traditionally dominant copyleft licenses from the FSF. While there does seem to be a rise in the use of permissive licenses, in general, there are several possible explanations for the phenomenon.

When the rumor mill starts

Sullivan gave a recent example of the claim of the decline of copyleft in an article on by Jono Bacon from February 2017 that showed a histogram of license usage between 2010 and 2017 (seen below).

From that, Bacon elaborates possible reasons for the apparent decline of the GPL. The graphic used in the article was actually generated by Stephen O'Grady in a January article, The State Of Open Source Licensing, which said:

In Black Duck's sample, the most popular variant of the GPL – version 2 – is less than half as popular as it was (46% to 19%). Over the same span, the permissive MIT has gone from 8% share to 29%, while its permissive cousin the Apache License 2.0 jumped from 5% to 15%.

Sullivan, however, argued that the methodology used to create both articles was problematic. Neither contains original research: the graphs actually come from the Black Duck Software "KnowledgeBase" data, which was partly created from the old Ohloh web site now known as Open Hub.

To show one problem with the data, Sullivan mentioned two free-software projects, GNU Bash and GNU Emacs, that had been showcased on the front page of in 2012. On the site, Bash was (and still is) listed as GPLv2+, whereas it changed to GPLv3 in 2011. He also claimed that "Emacs was listed as licensed under GPLv3-only, which is a license Emacs has never had in its history", although I wasn't able to verify that information from the Internet archive. Basically, according to Sullivan, "the two projects featured on the front page of a site that was using [the Black Duck] data set were wrong". This, in turn, seriously brings into question the quality of the data:

I reported this problem and we'll continue to do that but when someone is not sharing the data set that they're using for other people to evaluate it and we see glimpses of it which are incorrect, that should give us a lot of hesitation about accepting any conclusion that comes out of it.

Reproducible observations are necessary to the establishment of solid theories in science. Sullivan didn't try to contact Black Duck to get access to the database, because he assumed (rightly, as it turned out) that he would need to "pay for the data under terms that forbid you to share that information with anybody else". So I wrote Black Duck myself to confirm this information. In an email interview, Patrick Carey from Black Duck confirmed its data set is proprietary. He believes, however, that through a "combination of human and automated techniques", Black Duck is "highly confident at the accuracy and completeness of the data in the KnowledgeBase". He did point out, however, that "the way we track the data may not necessarily be optimal for answering the question on license use trend" as "that would entail examination of new open source projects coming into existence each year and the licenses used by them".

In other words, even according to Black Duck, its database may not be useful to establish the conclusions drawn by those articles. Carey did agree with those conclusions intuitively, however, saying that "there seems to be a shift toward Apache and MIT licenses in new projects, though I don't have data to back that up". He suggested that "an effective way to answer the trend question would be to analyze the new projects on GitHub over the last 5-10 years." Carey also suggested that "GitHub has become so dominant over the recent years that just looking at projects on GitHub would give you a reasonable sampling from which to draw conclusions".

Indeed, GitHub published a report in 2015 that also seems to confirm MIT's popularity (45%), surpassing copyleft licenses (24%). The data is, however, not without its own limitations. For example, in the above graph going back to the inception of GitHub in 2008, we see a rather abnormal spike in 2013, which seems to correlate with the launch of the site, described by GitHub as "our first pass at making open source licensing on GitHub easier".

In his talk, Sullivan was critical of the initial version of the site which he described as biased toward permissive licenses. Because the GitHub project creation page links to the site, Sullivan explained that the site's bias could have actually influenced GitHub users' license choices. Following a talk from Sullivan at FOSDEM 2016, GitHub addressed the problem later that year by rewording parts of the front page to be more accurate, but that any change in license choice obviously doesn't show in the report produced in 2015 and won't affect choices users have already made. Therefore, there can be reasonable doubts that GitHub's subset of software projects may not actually be that representative of the larger free-software community.

In search of solid evidence

So it seems we are missing good, reproducible results to confirm or dispel these claims. Sullivan explained that it is a difficult problem, if only in the way you select which projects to analyze: the impact of a MIT-licensed personal wiki will obviously be vastly different from, say, a GPL-licensed C compiler or kernel. We may want to distinguish between active and inactive projects. Then there is the problem of code duplication, both across publication platforms (a project may be published on GitHub and SourceForge for example) but also across projects (code may be copy-pasted between projects). We should think about how to evaluate the license of a given project: different files in the same code base regularly have different licenses—often none at all. This is why having a clear, documented and publicly available data set and methodology is critical. Without this, the assumptions made are not clear and it is unreasonable to draw certain conclusions from the results.

It turns out that some researchers did that kind of open research in 2016 in a paper called "The Debsources Dataset: Two Decades of Free and Open Source Software" [PDF] by Matthieu Caneill, Daniel M. Germán, and Stefano Zacchiroli. The Debsources data set is the complete Debian source code that covers a large history of the Debian project and therefore includes thousands of free-software projects of different origins. According to the paper:

The long history of Debian creates a perfect subject to evaluate how FOSS licenses use has evolved over time, and the popularity of licenses currently in use.

Sullivan argued that the Debsources data set is interesting because of its quality: every package in Debian has been reviewed by multiple humans, including the original packager, but also by the FTP masters to ensure that the distribution can legally redistribute the software. The existence of a package in Debian provides a minimal "proof of use": unmaintained packages get removed from Debian on a regular basis and the mere fact that a piece of software gets packaged in Debian means at least some users found it important enough to work on packaging it. Debian packagers make specific efforts to avoid code duplication between packages in order to ease security maintenance. The data set covers a period longer than Black Duck's or GitHub's, as it goes all the way back to the Hamm 2.0 release in 1998. The data and how to reproduce it are freely available under a CC BY-SA 4.0 license.

Sullivan presented the above graph from the research paper that showed the evolution of software license use in the Debian archive. Whereas previous graphs showed statistics in percentages, this one showed actual absolute numbers, where we can't actually distinguish a decline in copyleft licenses. To quote the paper again:

The top license is, once again, GPL-2.0+, followed by: Artistic-1.0/GPL dual-licensing (the licensing choice of Perl and most Perl libraries), GPL-3.0+, and Apache-2.0.

Indeed, looking at the graph, at most do we see a rise of the Apache and MIT licenses and no decline of the GPL per se, although its adoption does seem to slow down in recent years. We should also mention the possibility that Debian's data set has the opposite bias: toward GPL software. The Debian project is culturally quite different from the GitHub community and even the larger free-software ecosystem, naturally, which could explain the disparity in the results. We can only hope a similar analysis can be performed on the much larger Software Heritage data set eventually, which may give more representative results. The paper acknowledges this problem:

Debian is likely representative of enterprise use of FOSS as a base operating system, where stable, long-term and seldomly updated software products are desirable. Conversely Debian is unlikely representative of more dynamic FOSS environments (e.g., modern Web-development with micro libraries) where users, who are usually developers themselves, expect to receive library updates on a daily basis.

The Debsources research also shares methodology limitations with Black Duck: while Debian packages are reviewed before uploading and we can rely on the copyright information provided by Debian maintainers, the research also relies on automated tools (specifically FOSSology) to retrieve license information.

Sullivan also warned against "ascribing reason to numbers": people may have different reasons for choosing a particular license. Developers may choose the MIT license because it has fewer words, for compatibility reasons, or simply because "their lawyers told them to". It may not imply an actual deliberate philosophical or ideological choice.

Finally, he brought up the theory that the rise of non-copyleft licenses isn't necessarily at the detriment of the GPL. He explained that, even if there is an actual decline, it may not be much of a problem if there is an overall growth of free software to the detriment of proprietary software. He reminded the audience that non-copyleft licenses are still free software, according to the FSF and the Debian Free Software Guidelines, so their rise is still a positive outcome. Even if the GPL is a better tool to accomplish the goal of a free-software world, we can all acknowledge that the conversion of proprietary software to more permissive—and certainly simpler—licenses is definitely heading in the right direction.

[I would like to thank the DebConf organizers for providing meals for me during the conference.]

Note: this article first appeared in the Linux Weekly News.

Catégories: External Blogs

My free software activities, July 2017

Anarcat - sam, 07/29/2017 - 16:16
Debian Long Term Support (LTS)

This is my monthly working on Debian LTS. This time I worked on various hairy issues surrounding ca-certificates, unattended-upgrades, apache2 regressions, libmtp, tcpdump and ipsec-tools.

ca-certificates updates

I've been working on the removal of the Wosign and StartCom certificates (Debian bug #858539) and, in general, the synchronisation of ca-certificates across suites (Debian bug #867461) since at least last march. I have made an attempt at summarizing the issue which led to a productive discussion and it seems that, in the end, the maintainer will take care of synchronizing information across suites.

Guido was right in again raising the question of synchronizing NSS across all suites (Debian bug #824872) which itself raised the other question of how to test reverse dependencies. This brings me back to Debian bug #817286 which, basically proposed the idea of having "proposed updates" for security issues. The problem is while we can upload test packages to stable proposed-updates, we can't do the same in LTS because the suite is closed and we operate only on security packages. This issue came up before in other security upload and we need to think better about how to solve this.


Speaking of security upgrades brings me to the question of a bug (Debian bug #867169) that was filed against the wheezy version of unattended-upgrades, which showed that the package simply stopped working since the latest stable release, because wheezy became "oldoldstable". I first suggested using the "codename" but that appears to have been introduced only after wheezy.

In the end, I proposed a simple update that would fix the configuration files and uploaded this as DLA-1032-1. This is thankfully fixed in later releases and will not require such hackery when jessie becomes LTS as well.


Next up is the work on the libmtp vulnerabilities (CVE-2017-9831 and CVE-2017-9832). As I described in my announcement, the work to backport the patch was huge, as upstream basically backported a whole library from the gphoto2 package to fix those issues (and probably many more). The lack of a test suite made it difficult to trust my own work, but given that I had no (negative) feedback, I figured it was okay to simply upload the result and that became DLA-1029-1.


I then looked at reproducing CVE-2017-11108, a heap overflow triggered tcpdump would parse specifically STP packets. In Debian bug #867718, I described how to reproduce the issue across all suites and opened an issue upstream, given that the upstream maintainers hadn't responded responded in weeks according to notes in the RedHat Bugzilla issue. I eventually worked on a patch which I shared upstream, but that was rejected as they were already working on it in their embargoed repository.

I can explain this confusion and duplication of work with:

  1. the original submitter didn't really contact
  2. he did and they didn't reply, being just too busy
  3. they replied and he didn't relay that information back

I think #2 is most likely: the folks are probably very busy with tons of reports like this. Still, I should probably have contacted directly before starting my work, even though no harm was done because I didn't divulge issues that were already public.

Since then, tcpdump has released 4.9.1 which fixes the issue, but then new CVEs came out that will require more work and probably another release. People looking into this issue must be certain to coordinate with the tcpdump security team before fixing the actual issues.


Another package that didn't quite have a working solution is the ipsec-tools suite, in which the racoon daemon was vulnerable to a remotely-triggered DOS attack (CVE-2016-10396). I reviewed and fixed the upstream patch which introduced a regression. Unfortunately, there is no test suite or proof of concept to control the results.

The reality is that ipsec-tools is really old, and should maybe simply be removed from Debian, in favor of strongswan. Upstream hasn't done a release in years and various distributions have patched up forks of those to keep it alive... I was happy, however, to know that a maintainer will take care of updating the various suites, including LTS, with my improved patch. So this fixes the issue for now, but I would strongly encourage users to switch away from ipsec-tools in the future.


Finally, I was bitten by the old DLA-841-1 upload I did all the way back in February, as it introduced a regression (Debian bug #858373). It turns out it was possible to segfault Apache workers with a trivial HTTP request, in certain (rather exotic, I might add) configurations (ErrorDocument 400 directive pointing to a cgid script in worker mode).

Still, it was a serious regression and I found a part of the nasty long patch we worked on back then that was faulty, and introduced a small fix to correct that. The proposed package unfortunately didn't yield any feedback, and I can only assume it will work okay for people. The result is the DLA-841-2 upload which fixes the regression. I unfortunately didn't have time to work on the remaining CVEs affecting apache2 in LTS at the time of writing.


I also did some miscellaneous triage by filing Debian bug #867477 for poppler in an effort to document better the pending issue.

Next up was some minor work on eglibc issues. CVE-2017-8804 has a patch, but it's been disputed. since the main victim of this and the core of the vulnerability (rpcbind) has already been fixed, I am not sure this vulnerability is still a thing in LTS at all.

I also looked at CVE-2014-9984, but the code is so different in wheezy that I wonder if LTS is affected at all. Unfortunately, the eglibc gymnastics are a little beyond me and I do not feel confident enough to just push those issues aside for now and let them open for others to look at.

Other free software work

And of course, there's my usual monthly volunteer work. My ratio is a little better this time, having reached an about even ratio between paid and volunteer work, whereas this was 60% volunteer work in march.

Announcing ecdysis

I recently published ecdysis, a set of template and code samples that I frequently reuse across project. This is probably the least pronounceable project name I have ever chosen, but this is somewhat on purpose. The goal of this project is not collaboration or to become a library: it's just a personal project which I share with the world as a curiosity.

To quote the README file:

The name comes from what snakes and other animals do to "create a new snake": they shed their skin. This is not so appropriate for snakes, as it's just a way to rejuvenate their skin, but is especially relevant for anthropods since then "ecdysis" may be associated with a metamorphosis:

Ecdysis is the moulting of the cuticle in many invertebrates of the clade Ecdysozoa. Since the cuticle of these animals typically forms a largely inelastic exoskeleton, it is shed during growth and a new, larger covering is formed. The remnants of the old, empty exoskeleton are called exuviae. — Wikipedia

So this project is metamorphosed into others when the documentation templates, code examples and so on are reused elsewhere. For that reason, the license is an unusally liberal (for me) MIT/Expat license.

The name also has the nice property of being absolutely unpronounceable, which makes it unlikely to be copied but easy to search online.

It was an interesting exercise to go back into older projects and factor out interesting code. The process is not complete yet, as there are older projects I'm still curious in reviewing. A bunch of that code could also be factored into upstream project and maybe even the Python standard library.

In short, this is stuff I keep on forgetting how to do: a proper config, some fancy argparse extensions and so on. Instead of having to remember where I had written that clever piece of code, I now shove it in the crazy chaotic project where I can find it again in the future.

Beets experiments

Since I started using Subsonic (or Libresonic) to manage the music on my phone, album covers are suddenly way more interesting. But my collection so far has had limited album covers: my other media player (gmpc) would download those on the fly on its own and store them in its own database - not on the filesystem. I guess this could be considered to be a limitation of Subsonic, but I actually appreciate the separation of duty here. Garbage in, garbage out: the quality of Subsonic's rendering depends largely on how well setup your library and tags are.

It turns out there is an amazing tool called beets to do exactly that kind of stuff. I originally discarded that "media library management system for obsessive-compulsive [OC] music geeks", trying to convince myself i was not an "OC music geek". Turns out I am. Oh well.

Thanks to beets, I was able to download album covers for a lot of the albums in my collection. The only covers that are missing now are albums that are not correctly tagged and that beets couldn't automatically fix up. I still need to go through those and fix all those tags, but the first run did an impressive job at getting album covers.

Then I got the next crazy idea: after a camping trip where we forgot (again) the lyrics to Georges Brassens, I figured I could start putting some lyrics on my ebook reader. "How hard can that be?" of course, being the start of another crazy project. A pull request and 3 days later, I had something that could turn a beets lyrics database into a Sphinx document which, in turn, can be turned into an ePUB. In the process, I probably got blocked from MusixMatch a hundred times, but it's done. Phew!

The resulting e-book is about 8000 pages long, but is still surprisingly responsive. In the process, I also happened to do a partial benchmark of Python's bloom filter libraries. The biggest surprise there was the performance of the set builtin: for small items, it is basically as fast as a bloom filter. Of course, when the item size grows larger, its memory usage explodes, but in this case it turned out to be sufficient and bloom filter completely overkill and confusing.

Oh, and thanks to those efforts, I got admitted in the beetbox organization on GitHub! I am not sure what I will do with that newfound power: I was just scratching an itch, really. But hopefully I'll be able to help here and there in the future as well.

Debian package maintenance

I did some normal upkeep on a bunch of my packages this month, that were long overdue:

  • uploaded slop 6.3.47-1: major new upstream release
  • uploaded an NMU for maim 5.4.64-1.1: maim was broken by the slop release
  • uploaded pv 1.6.6-1: new upstream release
  • uploaded kedpm 1.0+deb8u1 to jessie (oldstable): one last security fix (Debian bug #860817, CVE-2017-8296) for that derelict password manager
  • uploaded charybdis 3.5.5-1: new minor upstream release, with optional support for mbedtls
  • filed Debian bug #866786 against cryptsetup to make the remote initramfs SSH-based unlocking support multiple devices: thanks to the maintainer, this now works flawlessly in buster and may be backported to stretch
  • expanded on Debian bug #805414 against gdm3 and Debian bug #845938 against pulseaudio, because I had trouble connecting my computer to this new Bluetooth speaker. turns out this is a known issue in Pulseaudio: whereas it releases ALSA devices, it doesn't release Bluetooth devices properly. Documented this more clearly in the wiki page
  • filed Debian bug #866790 regarding old stray Apparmor profiles that were lying around my system after an upgrade, which got me interested in Debian bug #830502 in turn
  • filed Debian bug #868728 against cups regarding a weird behavior I had interacting with a network printer. turns out the other workstation was misconfigured... why are printers still so hard?
  • filed Debian bug #870102 to automate sbuild schroots upgrades
  • after playing around with rash tried to complete the packaging (Debian bug #754972) of percol with this pull request upstream. this ended up to be way too much overhead and I reverted to my old normal history habits.
Catégories: External Blogs

My free software activities, June 2017

Anarcat - lun, 07/03/2017 - 11:37
Debian Long Term Support (LTS)

This is my monthly Debian LTS report. This time I worked on Mercurial, sudo and Puppet.

Mercurial remote code execution

I issued DLA-1005-1 to resolve problems with the hg server --stdio command that could be abused by "remote authenticated users to launch the Python debugger, and consequently execute arbitrary code, by using --debugger as a repository name" (CVE-2017-9462).

Backporting the patch was already a little tricky because, as is often the case in our line of work, the code had changed significantly in newer version. In particular, the commandline dispatcher had been refactored which made the patch non-trivial to port. On the other hand, mercurial has an extensive test suite which allowed me to make those patches in all confidence. I also backported a part of the test suite to detect certain failures better and to fix the output so that it matches the backported code. The test suite is slow, however, which meant slow progress when working on this package.

I also noticed a strange issue with the test suite: all hardlink operations would fail. Somehow it seems that my new sbuild setup doesn't support doing hardlinks. I ended up building a tarball schroot to build those types of packages, as it seems the issue is related to the use of overlayfs in sbuild. The odd part is my tests of overlayfs, following those instructions, show that it does support hardlinks, so there maybe something fishy here that I misunderstand.

This, however, allowed me to get a little more familiar with sbuild and the schroots. I also took this opportunity to optimize the builds by installing an apt-cacher-ng proxy to speed up builds, which will also be useful for regular system updates.

Puppet remote code execution

I have issued DLA-1012-1 to resolve a remote code execution attack against puppetmaster servers, from authenticated clients. To quote the advisory: "Versions of Puppet prior to 4.10.1 will deserialize data off the wire (from the agent to the server, in this case) with a attacker-specified format. This could be used to force YAML deserialization in an unsafe manner, which would lead to remote code execution."

The fix was non-trivial. Normally, this would have involved fixing the YAML parsing, but this was considered problematic because the ruby libraries themselves were vulnerable and it wasn't clear we could fix the problem completely by fixing YAML parsing. The update I proposed took the bold step of switching all clients to PSON and simply deny YAML parsing from the server. This means all clients need to be updated before the server can be updated, but thankfully, updated clients will run against an older server as well. Thanks to LeLutin at Koumbit for helping in testing patches to solve this issue.

Sudo privilege escalation

I have issued DLA-1011-1 to resolve an incomplete fix for a privilege escalation issue (CVE-2017-1000368 from CVE-2017-1000367). The backport was not quite trivial as the code had changed quite a lot since wheezy as well. Whereas mercurial's code was more complex, it's nice to see that sudo's code was actually simpler and more straightforward in newer versions, which is reassuring. I uploaded the packages for testing and uploaded them a year later.

I also took extra time to share the patch in the Debian bugtracker, so that people working on the issue in stable may benefit from the backported patch, if needed. One issue that came up during that work is that sudo doesn't have a test suite at all, so it is quite difficult to test changes and make sure they do not break anything.

Should we upload on fridays?

I brought up a discussion on the mailing list regarding uploads on fridays. With the sudo and puppet uploads pending, it felt really ... daring to upload both packages, on a friday. Years of sysadmin work hardwired me to be careful on fridays; as the saying goes: "don't deploy on a friday if you don't want to work on the weekend!"

Feedback was great, but I was surprised to find that most people are not worried worried about those issues. I have tried to counter some of the arguments that were brought up: I wonder if there could be a disconnection here between the package maintainer / programmer work and the sysadmin work that is at the receiving end of that work. Having myself to deal with broken updates in the past, I'm surprised this has never come up in the discussions yet, or that the response is so underwhelming.

So far, I'll try to balance the need for prompt security updates and the need for stable infrastructure. One does not, after all, go without the other...


I also did small fry triage:

Hopefully some of those will come to fruitition shortly.

Other work

My other work this month was a little all over the place.


Uploaded a new release (0.4.1) of stressant to split up the documentation from the main package, as the main package was taking up too much space according to grml developers.

The release also introduces limited anonymity option, by blocking serial numbers display in the smartctl output.


Also did some small followup on the debiman project to fix the FAQ links.

Local server maintenance

I upgraded my main server to Debian stretch. This generally went well, althought the upgrade itself took way more time than I would have liked (4 hours!). This is partly because I have a lot of cruft installed on the server, but also because of what I consider to be issues in the automation of major Debian upgrades. For example, I was prompted for changes in configuration files at seemingly random moments during the upgrade, and got different debconf prompts to answer. This should really be batched together, and unfortunately I had forgotten to use the home-made script I established when i was working at Koumbit which shortens the upgrade a bit.

I wish we would improve on our major upgrade mechanism. I documented possible solutions for this in the AutomatedUpgrade wiki page, but I'm not sure I see exactly where to go from here.

I had a few regressions after the upgrade:

  • the infrared remote control stopped working: still need to investigate
  • my home-grown full-disk encryption remote unlocking script broke, but upstream has a nice workaround, see Debian bug #866786
  • gdm3 breaks bluetooth support (Debian bug #805414 - to be fair, this is not a regression in stretch, it's just that I switched my workstation from lightdm to gdm3 after learning that the latter can do rootless X11!)
Docker and Subsonic

I did my first (and late?) foray into Docker and containers. My rationale was that I wanted to try out Subsonic, an impressive audio server which some friends have shown me. Since Subsonic is proprietary, I didn't want it to contaminate the rest of my server and it seemed like a great occasion to try out containers to keep things tidy. Containers may also allow me to transparently switch to the FLOSS fork LibreSonic once the trial period is over.

I have learned a lot and may write more about the details of that experience soon, for now you can look at the contributions I made to the unofficial Subsonic docker image, but also the LibreSonic one.

Since Subsonic also promotes album covers as first-class citizens, I used beets to download a lot of album covers, which was really nice. I look forward to using beets more, but first I'll need to implement two plugins.


I did a small release of wallabako to fix the build with the latest changes in the underlying wallabago library, which led me to ask upstream to make versionned releases.

I also looked into creating a separate documentation site but it looks like mkdocs doesn't like me very much: the table of contents is really ugly...

Small fry

That's about it! And that was supposed to be a slow month...

Catégories: External Blogs

Alioth moving toward pagure

Anarcat - mer, 06/14/2017 - 12:00

Since 2003, the Debian project has been running a server called Alioth to host source code version control systems. The server will hit the end of life of the Debian LTS release (Wheezy) next year; that deadline raised some questions regarding the plans for the server over the coming years. Naturally, that led to a discussion regarding possible replacements.

In response, the current Alioth maintainer, Alexander Wirt, announced a sprint to migrate to pagure, a free-software "Git-centered forge" written in Python for the Fedora project, which LWN covered last year. Alioth currently runs FusionForge, previously known as GForge, which is the free-software fork of the SourceForge code base when that service closed its source in 2001. Alioth hosts source code repositories, mainly Git and Subversion (SVN) and, like other "forge" sites, also offers forums, issue trackers, and mailing list services. While other alternatives are still being evaluated, a consensus has emerged on a migration plan from FusionForage to a more modern and minimal platform based on pagure.

Why not GitLab?

While this may come as a surprise to some who would expect Debian to use the more popular GitLab project, the discussion and decision actually took place a while back. During a lengthy debate last year, Debian contributors discussed the relative merits of different code-hosting platforms, following the initiative of Debian Developer "Pirate" Praveen Arimbrathodiyil to package GitLab for Debian. At that time, Praveen also got a public GitLab instance running for Debian (, which was sponsored by GitLab B.V. — the commercial entity behind the GitLab project. The sponsorship was originally offered in 2015 by the GitLab CEO, presumably to counter a possible move to GitHub, as there was a discussion about creating a GitHub Organization for Debian at the time. The deployment of a Debian-specific GitLab instance then raised the question of the overlap with the already existing service, which is backed by Alioth's FusionForge deployment. It then seemed natural that the new GitLab instance would replace Alioth.

But when Praveen directly proposed to move to GitLab, Wirt stepped in and explained that a migration plan was already in progress. The plan then was to migrate to a simpler gitolite-based setup, a decision that was apparently made in corridor discussions surrounding the Alioth Git replacement BoF held during Debconf 2015. The first objection raised by Wirt against GitLab was its "huge number of dependencies". Another issue Wirt identified was the "open core / enterprise model", preferring a "real open source system", an opinion which seems shared by other participants on the mailing list. Wirt backed his concerns with an hypothetical example:

Debian needs feature X but it is already in the enterprise version. We make a patch and, for commercial reasons, it never gets merged (they already sell it in the enterprise version). Which means we will have to fork the software and keep those patches forever. Been there done that. For me, that isn't acceptable.

This concern was further deepened when GitLab's Director of Strategic Partnerships, Eliran Mesika, explained the company's stewardship policy that explains how GitLab decides which features end up in the proprietary version. Praveen pointed out that:

[...] basically it boils down to features that they consider important for organizations with less than 100 developers may get accepted. I see that as a red flag for a big community like debian.

Since there are over 600 Debian Developers, the community seems to fall within the needs of "enterprise" users. The features the Debian community may need are, by definition, appropriate only to the "Enterprise Edition" (GitLab EE), the non-free version, and are therefore unlikely to end up in the "Community Edition" (GitLab CE), the free-software version.

Interestingly, Mesika asked for clarification on which features were missing, explaining that GitLab is actually open to adding features to GitLab CE. The response from Debian Developer Holger Levsen was categorical: "It's not about a specific patch. Free GitLab and we can talk again." But beyond the practical and ethical concerns, some specific features Debian needs are currently only in GitLab EE. For example, systems use LDAP for authentication, which would obviously be useful in a GitLab deployment; GitLab CE supports basic LDAP authentication, but advanced features, like group or SSH-key synchronization, are only available in GitLab EE.

Wirt also expressed concern about the Contributor License Agreement that GitLab B.V. requires contributors to sign when they send patches, which forces users to allow the release of their code under a non-free license.

The debate then went on going through a exhaustive inventory of different free-software alternatives:

  • GitLab, a Ruby-based GitHub replacement, dual-licensed MIT/Commercial
  • Gogs, Go, MIT
  • Gitblit, Java, Apache-licensed
  • Kallithea, in Python, also supports Mercurial, GPLv3
  • and finally, pagure, also written Python, GPLv2

A feature comparison between each project was created in the Debian wiki as well. In the end, however, Praveen gave up on replacing Alioth with GitLab because of the controversy and moved on to support the pagure migration, which resolved the discussion in July 2016.

More recently, Wirt admitted in an IRC conversation that "on the technical side I like GitLab a lot more than pagure" and that "as a user, GitLab is much nicer than pagure and it has those nice CI [continuous integration] features". However, as he explained in his blog "GitLab is Opencore, [and] that it is not entirely opensource. I don't think we should use software licensed under such a model for one of our core services" which leaves pagure as the only stable candidate. Other candidates were excluded on technical grounds, according to Wirt: Gogs "doesn't scale well" and a quick security check didn't yield satisfactory results; "Gitblit is Java" and Kallithea doesn't have support for accessing repositories over SSH (although there is a pending pull request to add the feature).

In an email interview, Sid Sijbrandij, CEO of GitLab, did say that "we want to make sure that our open source edition can be used by open source projects". He gave examples of features liberated following requests by the community, such as branded login pages for the VLC project and GitLab Pages after popular demand. He stressed that "There are no artificial limits in our open source edition and some organizations use it with more than 20.000 users." So if the concern of the Debian community is that features may be missing from GitLab CE, there is definitely an opening from GitLab to add those features. If, however, the concern is purely ethical, it's hard to see how an agreement could be reached. As Sijbrandij put it:

On the mailinglist it seemed that some Debian maintainers do not agree with our open core business model and demand that there is no proprietary version. We respect that position but we don't think we can compete with the purely proprietary software like GitHub with this model.

Working toward a pagure migration

The issue of Alioth maintenance came up again last month when Boyuan Yang asked what would happen to Alioth when support for Debian LTS (Wheezy) ends next year. Wirt brought up the pagure migration proposal and the community tried to make a plan for the migration.

One of the issues raised was the question of the non-Git repositories hosted on Alioth, as pagure, like GitLab, only supports Git. Indeed, Ben Hutchings calculated that while 90% (\~19,000) of the repositories currently on Alioth are Git, there are 2,400 SVN repositories and a handful of Mercurial, Bazaar (bzr), Darcs, Arch, and even CVS repositories. As part of an informal survey, however, most packaging teams explained they either had already migrated away from SVN to Git or were in the process of doing so. The largest CVS user, the web site team, also explained it was progressively migrating to Git. Mattia Rizzolo then proposed that older repository services like SVN could continue running even if FusionForge goes down, as FusionForge is, after all, just a web interface to manage those back-end services. Repository creation would be disabled, but older repositories would stay operational until they migrate to Git. This would, effectively, mean the end of non-Git repository support for new projects in the Debian community, at least officially.

Another issue is the creation of a Debian package for pagure. Ironically, while Praveen and other Debian maintainers have been working for 5 years to package GitLab for Debian, pagure isn't packaged yet. Antonio Terceiro, another Debian Developer, explained this isn't actually a large problem for services: "note that DSA [Debian System Administrator team] does not need/want the service software itself packaged, only its dependencies". Indeed, for Debian-specific code bases like or, it may not make sense to have the overhead of maintaining Debian packages since those tools have limited use outside of the Debian project directly. While Debian derivatives and other distributions could reuse them, what usually happens is that other distributions roll their own software, like Ubuntu did with the Launchpad project. Still, Paul Wise, a member of the DSA team, reasoned that it was better, in the long term, to have Debian packages for services:

Personally I'm leaning towards the feeling that all configuration, code and dependencies for Debian services should be packaged and subjected to the usual Debian QA activities but I acknowledge that the current archive setup (testing migration plus backporting etc) doesn't necessarily make this easy.

Wise did say that "DSA doesn't have any hard rules/policy written down, just evaluation on a case-by-case basis" which probably means that pagure packaging will not be a blocker for deployment.

The last pending issue is the question of the mailing lists hosted on Alioth, as pagure doesn't offer mailing list management (nor does GitLab). In fact, there are three different mailing list services for the Debian project:

Wirt, with his "list-master hat" on, explained that the main mailing list service is "not really suited as a self-service" and expressed concern at the idea of migrating the large number mailing lists hosted on Alioth. Indeed, there are around 1,400 lists on Alioth while the main service has a set of 300 lists selected by the list masters. No solution for those mailing lists was found at the time of this writing.

In the end, it seems like the Debian project has chosen pagure, the simpler, less featureful, but also less controversial, solution and will use the same hosting software as their fellow Linux distribution, Fedora. Wirt is also considering using FreeIPA for account management on top of pagure. The plan is to migrate away from FusionForge one bit at a time, and pagure is the solution for the first step: the Git repositories. Lists, other repositories, and additional features of FusionForge will be dealt with later on, but Wirt expects a plan to come out of the upcoming sprint.

It will also be interesting to see how the interoperability promises of pagure will play out in the Debian world. Even though the federation features of pagure are still at the early stages, one can already clone issues and pull requests as Git repositories, which allows for a crude federation mechanism.

In any case, given the long history and the wide variety of workflows in the Debian project, it is unlikely that a single tool will solve all problems. Alioth itself has significant overlap with other Debian services; not only does it handle mailing lists and forums, but it also has its own issue tracker that overlaps with the Debian bug tracking system (BTS). This is just the way things are in Debian: it is an old project with lots of moving part. As Jonathan Dowland put it: "The nature of the project is loosely-coupled, some redundancy, lots of legacy cruft, and sadly more than one way to do it."

Hopefully, pagure will not become part of that "legacy redundant cruft". But at this point, the focus is on keeping the services running in a simpler, more maintainable way. The discussions between Debian and GitLab are still going on as we speak, but given how controversial the "open core" model used by GitLab is for the Debian community, pagure does seem like a more logical alternative.

Note: this article first appeared in the Linux Weekly News.

Catégories: External Blogs

Montréal-Python 65: Quadratic Radicalism

Montreal Python - dim, 06/11/2017 - 23:00

Come join us for our last Montreal meetup of the season.

After the presentations, we will be heading to Benelux, so we can share a drink or two together, so we can welcome the summer!

If you want to give a lightning talk (5 minutes presentation), you can still submit it. Send us an email to or send ping us on the channel #talks in the Montreal-Python Slack


Shopify Offices 490 de la Gauchetière street Montréal, Québec


Monday, June 19th, 2017 at 6PM

  • 6:00PM - Door will open
  • 6:30PM - Start of presentations
  • 7:15PM - Break
  • 7:30PM - Presentations
  • 8:00PM - End of event
  • 8:30PM - Benelux
Presentations Tuyet Minh Truong - Microcomputational Microphone Robert Dupuis - Collaborative Versioning of Scientific Articles: IEEESoftware Alexandre Desilets-Benoit - Startup world from a cynical scientist:

“A story of using scikit learn & life lessons from building startup

Alberto Pepe - 21st-century research, 17th-century publishing

Researchers spend their days doing cutting-edge work. But when it comes time to writing, publishing, and disseminating their work, they’re often still using models and tools that haven’t changed much in decades, if not centuries. Research does not advance through isolated scientific results, but through the publication and dissemination thereof. Scientists get recognition through citation and reputation. Open Science is the philosophical view that sharing benefits scientific research and, hence, that barriers to sharing ideas and methods should be lowered as much as possible. The practice of Open Science addresses the question of how to lower these barriers---whether cultural, systemic, methodological or technical. Authorea is a new collaborative, web-based platform that lowers these barriers via a technological solution for writing, editing and publishing that covers the research cycle from writing a first draft, through to submission and publication. Authorea lets you integrate data, code, and all the materials needed to reproduce scientific results in your papers. This lowers the technical barrier to sharing, paving the way for transparency and reproducibility---the very foundations of the scientific method. Authorea also supports the creation of mixed-format documents including LaTeX, markdown, and rich text. Authorea can propel the scientific paper into the 21st century! It is now in use at each of the top 100 research universities worldwide, across a diverse set of fields ranging from astrophysics to zoology.

Alberto Pepe is the co-founder of Authorea. He recently finished a Postdoctorate in Astrophysics at Harvard University.

Roberta Voulon (Les Pitonneux) - The Power of Community

To be announced

We’d like to thank our sponsors for their continued support:
  • Shopify
  • UQÀM
  • Bénélux
  • Savoir-faire Linux
Catégories: External Blogs

Epic Lameness

Eric Dorland - lun, 09/01/2008 - 17:26 now supports OpenID. Hooray! I'd like to make a comment on a thread about the RTL8187se chip I've got in my new MSI Wind. So I go to sign in with OpenID and instead of signing me in it prompts me to create an account with a name, username and password for the account. Huh? I just want to post to their forum, I don't want to create an account (at least not explicitly, if they want to do it behind the scenes fine). Isn't the point of OpenID to not have to create accounts and particularly not have to create new usernames and passwords to access websites? I'm not impressed.
Catégories: External Blogs

Sentiment Sharing

Eric Dorland - lun, 08/11/2008 - 23:28
Biella, I am from there and I do agree. If I was still living there I would try to form a team and make a bid. Simon even made noises about organizing a bid at DebConfs past. I wish he would :)

But a DebConf in New York would be almost as good.
Catégories: External Blogs
Syndiquer le contenu