In order to further secure access to my workstation, after the switch to Gentoo sources, I now enabled two-factor authentication through my Yubico U2F USB device. Well, at least for local access - remote access through SSH requires both userid/password as well as the correct SSH key, by chaining authentication methods in OpenSSH.
Enabling U2F on (Gentoo) Linux is fairly easy. The various guides online which talk
pam_u2f setup are indeed correct that it is fairly simple. For completeness
sake, I've documented what I know on the Gentoo Wiki, as the pam_u2f article.
Yesterday I've switched to the gentoo-sources kernel package on Gentoo Linux. And with that, I also attempted (succesfully) to use the propriatary nvidia drivers so that I can enjoy both a smoother 3D experience while playing minecraft, as well as use the CUDA support so I don't need to use cloud-based services for small exercises.
The move to nvidia was quite simple, as the nvidia-drivers wiki article on the Gentoo wiki was quite easy to follow.
You've might already read it on the Gentoo news site, the Hardened Linux kernel sources are removed from the tree due to the grsecurity change where the grsecurity Linux kernel patches are no longer provided for free. The decision was made due to supportability and maintainability reasons.
That doesn't mean that users who want to stick with the grsecurity related hardening features are left alone. Agostino Sarubbo has started providing sys-kernel/grsecurity-sources for the users who want to stick with it, as it is based on minipli's unofficial patchset. I seriously hope that the patchset will continue to be maintained and, who knows, even evolve further.
Personally though, I'm switching to the Gentoo sources, and stick with SELinux as one of the protection measures. And with that, I might even start using my NVidia graphics card a bit more, as that one hasn't been touched in several years (I have an Optimus-capable setup with both an Intel integrated graphics card and an NVidia one, but all attempts to use nouveau for the one game I like to play - minecraft - didn't work out that well).
This is a long read, skip to “Prioritizing the projects and changes” for the approach details...
Organizations and companies generally have an IT workload (dare I say, backlog?) which needs to be properly assessed, prioritized and taken up. Sometimes, the IT team(s) get an amount of budget and HR resources to "do their thing", while others need to continuously ask for approval to launch a new project or instantiate a change.
Sizeable organizations even require engineering and development effort on IT projects which are not readily available: specialized teams exist, but they are governance-wise assigned to projects. And as everyone thinks their project is the top-most priority one, many will be disappointed when they hear there are no resources available for their pet project.
So... how should organizations prioritize such projects?
Many organizations struggle with the all-time increase in IP address allocation and the accompanying need for segmentation. In the past, governing the segments within the organization means keeping close control over the service deployments, firewall rules, etc.
Lately, the idea of micro-segmentation, supported through software-defined networking solutions, seems to defy the need for a segmentation governance. However, I think that that is a very short-sighted sales proposition. Even with micro-segmentation, or even pure point-to-point / peer2peer communication flow control, you'll still be needing a high level overview of the services within your scope.
In this blog post, I'll give some insights in how we are approaching this in the company I work for. In short, it starts with requirements gathering, creating labels to assign to deployments, creating groups based on one or two labels in a layered approach, and finally fixating the resulting schema and start mapping guidance documents (policies) toward the presented architecture.
Today I was attempting to update a local repository, when SSH complained about a changed fingerprint, something like the following:
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ @ WARNING: REMOTE HOST IDENTIFICATION HAS CHANGED! @ @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ IT IS POSSIBLE THAT SOMEONE IS DOING SOMETHING NASTY! Someone could be eavesdropping on you right now (man-in-the-middle attack)! It is also possible that a host key has just been changed. The fingerprint for the ECDSA key sent by the remote host is SHA256:p4ZGs+YjsBAw26tn2a+HPkga1dPWWAWX+NEm4Cv4I9s. Please contact your system administrator. Add correct host key in /home/user/.ssh/known_hosts to get rid of this message. Offending ECDSA key in /home/user/.ssh/known_hosts:9 ECDSA host key for 192.168.56.101 has changed and you have requested strict checking. Host key verification failed.
I have been a long time user of Cyanogenmod, which discontinued its services end of 2016. Due to lack of (continuous) time, I was not able to switch over toward a different ROM. Also, I wasn't sure if LineageOS would remain the best choice for me or not. I wanted to review other ROMs for my Samsung Galaxy SIII (the i9300 model) phone.
Today, I made my choice and installed LineageOS.
A new release is now available for the cvechecker application. This is a stupid yet important bugfix release: the 3.7 release saw all newly released CVEs as being already known, so it did not take them up to the database. As a result, systems would never check for the new CVEs.
I recently created a new article on the Gentoo Wiki titled Certificates which talks about how to handle certificate stores on Gentoo Linux. The write-up of the article (which might still change name later, because it does not handle everything about certificates, mostly how to handle certificate stores) was inspired by the observation that I had to adjust the certificate stores of both Chromium and Firefox separately, even though they both use NSS.