January 2020 - wlug - list.wlug.org.nz

Marketroid boilerplate text
by Lawrence D'Oliveiro 17 Jan '20

17 Jan '20

I came across what might be described as a more “modern” alternative to the well-known “lorem ipsum” text for dummying up article layouts. You can find lots of occurrences of this all over the web with this search <https://www.google.com/search?q=Capitalize+on+low+hanging+fruit>, and frankly, most of them look like accidents. But I can’t find where this text originally came from. Anyone have any idea?

2 3

Pinebook Pro Review - US$199 Linux Powered ARM laptop
by Lawrence D'Oliveiro 17 Jan '20

17 Jan '20

Part <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dgNYQsdxlMw> of a series reviewing an ARM-based device that is not a Chromebook. Seems to have remarkable build quality for its price, offers versatility for those who like to tinker, and the battery life and performance are also quite reasonable. The main downside is some issues with multimedia in browsers (e.g. YouTube).

3 5

Bruce Schneier on 5G Security
by Peter Reutemann 17 Jan '20

17 Jan '20

'Bruce Schneier comments on the issues surrounding 5G security: [...] Keeping untrusted companies like Huawei out of Western infrastructure isn't enough to secure 5G. Neither is banning Chinese microchips, software, or programmers. Security vulnerabilities in the standards, the protocols and software for 5G, ensure that vulnerabilities will remain, regardless of who provides the hardware and software. These insecurities are a result of market forces that prioritize costs over security and of governments, including the United States, that want to preserve the option of surveillance in 5G networks. If the United States is serious about tackling the national security threats related to an insecure 5G network, it needs to rethink the extent to which it values corporate profits and government espionage over security. To be sure, there are significant security improvements in 5G over 4G in encryption, authentication, integrity protection, privacy, and network availability. But the enhancements aren't enough. The 5G security problems are threefold. First, the standards are simply too complex to implement securely. This is true for all software, but the 5G protocols offer particular difficulties. Because of how it is designed, the system blurs the wireless portion of the network connecting phones with base stations and the core portion that routes data around the world. Additionally, much of the network is virtualized, meaning that it will rely on software running on dynamically configurable hardware. This design dramatically increases the points vulnerable to attack, as does the expected massive increase in both things connected to the network and the data flying about it. Second, there's so much backward compatibility built into the 5G network that older vulnerabilities remain. 5G is an evolution of the decade-old 4G network, and most networks will mix generations. Without the ability to do a clean break from 4G to 5G, it will simply be impossible to improve security in some areas. Attackers may be able to force 5G systems to use more vulnerable 4G protocols, for example, and 5G networks will inherit many existing problems. Third, the 5G standards committees missed many opportunities to improve security. Many of the new security features in 5G are optional, and network operators can choose not to implement them. The same happened with 4G; operators even ignored security features defined as mandatory in the standard because implementing them was expensive. But even worse, for 5G, development, performance, cost, and time to market were all prioritized over security, which was treated as an afterthought.' -- source: https://mobile.slashdot.org/story/20/01/16/1514231 Cheers, Peter -- Peter Reutemann Dept. of Computer Science University of Waikato, NZ +64 (7) 858-5174 http://www.cms.waikato.ac.nz/~fracpete/ http://www.data-mining.co.nz/

1 0

Browser Benchmark Battle: Chrome Vs. Firefox Vs. Edge Vs. Brave
by Peter Reutemann 17 Jan '20

17 Jan '20

'It's been some 18 months since VentureBeat's last browser benchmark battle. What better time to get the latest results than the start of a new year? Over the past year and a half, Google Chrome has continued to dominate market share, Mozilla Firefox has doubled down on privacy, Microsoft Edge has embraced Chromium, and Brave launched out of beta. You can click on the individual test to see the results: SunSpider: Edge wins! Octane: Chrome wins! Kraken: Firefox wins! JetStream: Edge wins! MotionMark: Edge wins! Speedometer: Edge wins! Basemark: Brave wins! WebXPRT: Firefox wins! The Chromium version of Edge did a lot better given that the stable release only arrived this week. We were expecting improvements, but not so many outright wins. That said, browser performance was solid across all four contestants -- each browser won at least one test. Performance of course shouldn't be your only consideration when picking your preferred app for consuming internet content. As long as you're using a browser that receives regular updates (and all four of these meet that criteria), you can expect performance to be solid. There is certainly room for improvement, but Chrome, Firefox, and now Edge, as well as Brave, are all quite capable.' -- source: https://news.slashdot.org/story/20/01/16/180227 Cheers, Peter -- Peter Reutemann Dept. of Computer Science University of Waikato, NZ +64 (7) 858-5174 http://www.cms.waikato.ac.nz/~fracpete/ http://www.data-mining.co.nz/

1 0

The PinePhone starts shipping—a Linux-powered smartphone for $150
by Peter Reutemann 17 Jan '20

17 Jan '20

'Pine64 has announced that it is finally shipping the PinePhone, a smartphone that takes the rare step outside the Android/iOS duopoly and is designed to run mainline Linux distributions. The PinePhone starts shipping January 17 in the "Braveheart" developer edition. This initial "Braveheart" batch of devices is meant for "developer and early adopter" users, according to the Pine64 Store. The phone doesn't come with an end-user OS pre-installed and, instead, only comes with a factory test image that allows for easy verification that the hardware works. Users are expected to flash their own OS to the device. There are several available, from Ubuntu Touch to Sailfish OS, but they are all currently in an unfinished alpha state. Pine64 says that only enthusiasts with "extensive Linux experience" are the intended customer here—this isn't (yet?) a mainstream product. It's hard to mention PinePhone without mentioning that other Linux smartphone, the Purism Librem 5. They could both end up running the same software one day, but the two companies are taking totally different approaches to hardware. Purism has a hardline requirement for the hardware: it needs to be as open and freedom-focused as possible, which means the company couldn't use the typical supply chain that exists for Android phones. Purism has only a limited amount of open source-compatible vendors to choose from, and it uses M.2 socketed chips for the closed-source Wi-Fi/Bluetooth and Cell modem. The result is a device that is very thick (16mm), hot, and expensive, at $750. The PinePhone is less averse to binary blobs and is a lot closer to a normal smartphone. It's a more reasonable thickness (9mm) and a more reasonable price: $150.' -- source: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2020/01/the-pinephone-starts-shipping-a-lin… Cheers, Peter -- Peter Reutemann Dept. of Computer Science University of Waikato, NZ +64 (7) 858-5174 http://www.cms.waikato.ac.nz/~fracpete/ http://www.data-mining.co.nz/

1 0

NexDock 2 Review
by Lawrence D'Oliveiro 16 Jan '20

16 Jan '20

A look <https://www.theregister.co.uk/2020/01/15/nexdock_2_review/> at a device that looks like a laptop, but is really just a dock that can be used with either a Raspberry π or an Android phone. Apparently the Android experience is less than wonderful, but a Raspberry π 4 worked great, apart from its high power consumption.

1 0

Mozilla Lays Off 70 As It Waits For New Products To Generate Revenue
by Peter Reutemann 16 Jan '20

16 Jan '20

'According to TechCrunch, Mozilla has laid off about 70 employees today. From the report: In an internal memo, Mozilla chairwoman and interim CEO Mitchell Baker specifically mentions the slow rollout of the organization's new revenue-generating products as the reason for why it needed to take this decision. The overall number may still be higher, though, as Mozilla is still looking into how this decision will affect workers in the UK and France. In 2018, Mozilla Corporation (as opposed to the much smaller Mozilla Foundation) said it had about 1,000 employees worldwide. Baker says laid-off employees will receive "generous exit packages" and outplacement support. She also notes that the leadership team looked into shutting down the Mozilla innovation fund but decided that it needed it in order to continue developing new products. In total, Mozilla is dedicating $43 million to building new products. "You may recall that we expected to be earning revenue in 2019 and 2020 from new subscription products as well as higher revenue from sources outside of search. This did not happen," Baker writes in her memo. "Our 2019 plan underestimated how long it would take to build and ship new, revenue-generating products. Given that, and all we learned in 2019 about the pace of innovation, we decided to take a more conservative approach to projecting our revenue for 2020. We also agreed to a principle of living within our means, of not spending more than we earn for the foreseeable future." "As we look to the future, we know we must take bold steps to evolve and ensure the strength and longevity of our mission," Baker adds. "Mozilla has a strong line of sight to future revenue generation, but we are taking a more conservative approach to our finances. This will enable us to pivot as needed to respond to market threats to internet health, and champion user privacy and agency."' -- source: https://news.slashdot.org/story/20/01/15/2048210 Cheers, Peter -- Peter Reutemann Dept. of Computer Science University of Waikato, NZ +64 (7) 858-5174 http://www.cms.waikato.ac.nz/~fracpete/ http://www.data-mining.co.nz/

1 0

Microsoft Launches Chromium Edge for Windows 7, Windows 8, Windows 10, and macOS
by Peter Reutemann 16 Jan '20

16 Jan '20

'Microsoft today launched its new Edge browser based on Google's Chromium open source project. You can download Chromium Edge now for Windows 7, Windows 8, Windows 10, and macOS directly from microsoft.com/edge in more than 90 languages. From a report: Business features aside, there's also support for Chrome-based extensions, 4K streaming, Dolby audio, inking in PDF, and privacy tools. For the last one, it's worth noting that tracking prevention is on by default and offers three levels of control, like Firefox's tracking protection. Chrome extension support is probably the most important feature for most users. By default, extensions that have been ported over to Edge can be downloaded from the Microsoft Store. Chromium Edge also has an option to "Allow extensions from other stores" to get Chrome extensions from the Chrome Web Store. There are still a few features missing from Chromium Edge, most notably history sync and extension sync. Microsoft is working on these and some other inking functionality that it still wants to port from legacy Edge, as Microsoft is calling it. Microsoft also claims that Chromium Edge is "twice as fast as legacy Edge." Curiously, the team isn't making any claims against other browsers -- at least not yet.' -- source: https://tech.slashdot.org/story/20/01/15/187215 Cheers, Peter -- Peter Reutemann Dept. of Computer Science University of Waikato, NZ +64 (7) 858-5174 http://www.cms.waikato.ac.nz/~fracpete/ http://www.data-mining.co.nz/

1 0

More Than Half a Billion Android Users Have Installed 'Fleeceware' Apps
by Peter Reutemann 16 Jan '20

16 Jan '20

'Security researchers from Sophos say they've discovered a new set of "fleeceware" apps that appear to have been downloaded and installed by more than 600 million Android users. From a report: The term fleeceware is a recent addition to the cyber-security jargon. It was coined by UK cyber-security firm Sophos last September following an investigation that discovered a new type of financial fraud on the official Google Play Store. It refers to apps that abuse the ability for Android apps to run trial periods before a payment is charged to the user's account. By default, all users who sign up for an Android app trial period, have to cancel the trial period manually to avoid being charged. However, most users just uninstall an app when they don't like it. The vast majority of app developers interpret this action -- a user uninstalling their app -- as a trial period cancelation and don't follow through with a charge. But last year, Sophos discovered that some Android app developers didn't cancel an app's trial period once the app is uninstalled and they don't receive a specific request from the user. Sophos said it initially discovered 24 Android apps that were charging obscene fees (between $100 and $240 per year) for the most basic and simplistic apps, such as QR/barcode readers and calculators.' -- source: https://news.slashdot.org/story/20/01/15/1721256 Cheers, Peter -- Peter Reutemann Dept. of Computer Science University of Waikato, NZ +64 (7) 858-5174 http://www.cms.waikato.ac.nz/~fracpete/ http://www.data-mining.co.nz/

1 0

Linus Torvalds Versus ZFS
by Lawrence D'Oliveiro 14 Jan '20

14 Jan '20

Came across this article <https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2020/01/linus-torvalds-zfs-statements-arent…> reporting that Linus Torvalds recommends against using Sun/Oracle’s ZFS with Linux. The licensing issue (on top of Oracle’s infamous litigiousness) is a real concern, but the author also has a problem with Torvalds’ claims over filesystem performance and whether the code base is still being maintained or not. Out of curiosity, I went to read the original discussion thread. Not far along, I came across this <https://www.realworldtech.com/forum/?threadid=189711&curpostid=189959> later clarification by Torvalds: > Please, Linus, stop being arrogant and ignorant, read this > release note and tell us why you think ZFS is more of a buzzword > and has no real maintenance. I'm talking about small details like the fact that Oracle owns the copyrights, but turned things closed-source, so the "other" ZFS project is a fork of an old code base. If you are talking about ZFS, you're talking about the Oracle version. Do you think it has a lot of development going on? I don't know. And if you're talking about OpenZFS, then yes, there's clearly maintenance there, but it has all the questions about what happens if Oracle ever decides - again - that "copyright" means something different than anybody else thinks it means. Also the Ars Technica author seemed to feel that the kernel developers closed off certain kernel symbols to non-GPL code out of “spite”, to which Torvalds replies: > Not going out of your way to support ZFS is one thing. That we > completely perfectly understand. Going out of your way to > deliberately break ZFS is another thing. The kernel developers > are being assholes for doing that! We didn't go out of our way to deliberately break anything. But we do occasionally turn symbols that aren't meant to be used outside the kernel into GPL-only, because they have some internal implementation issues. The fact is, the whole point of the GPL is that you're being "paid" in terms of tit-for-tat: we give source code to you for free, but we want source code improvements back. If you don't do that but instead say "I think this is _legal_, but I'm not going to help you" you certainly don't get any help from us. So things that are outside the kernel tree simply do not matter to us. They get absolutely zero attention. We simply don't care. It's that simple. And things that don't do that "give back" have no business talking about us being assholes when we don't care about them.

1 0