When you configure your containers right it's better to attack the container software itself rather than the container

if you just want to DOS somethign containers are pretty awesome as target tough.

Again, docker kernel crash will kill the entire machine.

And all other things/customer things running on that machine.

https://contained.af/ Fun little project from Jess Frazelle showing that a well-made container can't be compromised, been up for 2 Years and no one has got clsoe to accessing the flag

If you need anyone to shill containers to you it would be her :P

if you just want to DOS somethign containers are pretty awesome as target tough.

Well, this applies to any other software that is running on a server. Notice: Good containers drop all unneeded capabilities including being run as root. When people use things wrong you can't help them

Well, this applies to any other software that is running on a server. Notice: Good containers drop all unneeded capabilities including being run as root. When people use things wrong you can't help them

You can never convince @Wolfshappen that containers are secure lol

Well, this applies to any other software that is running on a server. Notice: Good containers drop all unneeded capabilities including being run as root. When people use things wrong you can't help them

Yeah, you can disable any syscall you want, it's great however there are situations where you will want to use VMs

Yeah, you can disable any syscall you want, it's great however there are situations where you will want to use VMs

I totally agree. I don't want to replace VMs. Containers are for an application level isolation. VMs are OS level isolation. The combination is actually more secure than using only one thing. And just to mention it, docker isn't the perfect container technology. There is also rkt, systemd-nspawn, …. The point is that you can replace VMs with containers, where it makes sense. On the other hand there are places where it makes no sense, so you shouldn't do it. Containers target applications are microservices. Services that previously run on the same host as one big application now splitted in multiple small applications with the ability to scale. Yes, I can spawn vm images of them and when I run them as microkernel that's pretty awesome and actually more secure than containers but are ugly to develop right now. You can also run them as full featured VMs, which is also working but provides a lot of overhead. Containers simplify maintainence and work pretty well as you can see around the world. And actually they are on their way to empower on VM isolation level. How? Check Linuxkit. They build a linux kernel + container. That's it. So minimal, so easy to handle and very robust. And it works on a virtual machine (like you usually get around AWS, Azure, GCE, …) as well as on self-hosted virtual hosts. because on one side you run the containers, on the other side you run it as VM build by linuxkit. The point is: They are neither on the isolation level of VMs nor are they totally insecure. It's pretty complicated to crash the host from inside a container when it's done right. Proof? Check Amazon, Google, … All the container providers have customers that have working machines. So there has to be a way to do it correctly, and I would wonder when they are not target of people who try to attack these machines.

I totally agree. I don't want to replace VMs. Containers are for an application level isolation. VMs are OS level isolation. The combination is actually more secure than using only one thing. And just to mention it, docker isn't the perfect container technology. There is also rkt, systemd-nspawn, …. The point is that you can replace VMs with containers, where it makes sense. On the other hand there are places where it makes no sense, so you shouldn't do it. Containers target applications are microservices. Services that previously run on the same host as one big application now splitted in multiple small applications with the ability to scale. Yes, I can spawn vm images of them and when I run them as microkernel that's pretty awesome and actually more secure than containers but are ugly to develop right now. You can also run them as full featured VMs, which is also working but provides a lot of overhead. Containers simplify maintainence and work pretty well as you can see around the world. And actually they are on their way to empower on VM isolation level. How? Check Linuxkit. They build a linux kernel + container. That's it. So minimal, so easy to handle and very robust. And it works on a virtual machine (like you usually get around AWS, Azure, GCE, …) as well as on self-hosted virtual hosts. because on one side you run the containers, on the other side you run it as VM build by linuxkit. The point is: They are neither on the isolation level of VMs nor are they totally insecure. It's pretty complicated to crash the host from inside a container when it's done right. Proof? Check Amazon, Google, … All the container providers have customers that have working machines. So there has to be a way to do it correctly, and I would wonder when they are not target of people who try to attack these machines.

In combination, yes. :3

But then each service package gets its own container env on a vm with like, redis, pgsql, whatever cgi handler and thats it :P

But then each service package gets its own container env on a vm with like, redis, pgsql, whatever cgi handler and thats it :P

That depends on what/how you are doing it. Running multiple postgres instances on the same host as it's a DB host is sometimes useful as you can isolate the data this way better than in postgres itself. While you run on another host multiple web instances and so on. That's a question of how you want to orchestrate your applications

Does anyone have an issue that telegram has two icons in dash to dock?

Does anyone have an issue that telegram has two icons in dash to dock?

That happens in multiple apps, can't figure out. Tactical dot here in case of an answer (.)

Does anyone have an issue that telegram has two icons in dash to dock?

The launcher has not been updated to reflect the startup name in that case. Are you using xvitalys version or the binary Pile of Garbage from the telegram website?

If the latter, delete entirely and install rpmfusion, then dnf install telegram-desktop

The launcher has not been updated to reflect the startup name in that case. Are you using xvitalys version or the binary Pile of Garbage from the telegram website?

I just installed it from rpmfusion repo

I just installed it from rpmfusion repo

Then report to @xvitaly Duplicate Launcher Icon for telegram in Dash to dock

Okay, thanks

And other issue, that I haven't icon in tray for dropbox :(

Can someone help with it?

And other issue, that I haven't icon in tray for dropbox :(

<$cynical_reconsider_dropbox_at_all/> Install gnome-shell-extension-topicons-plus reboot or logout and login enable topicons plus in tweak tool

already did it, telegram icon, skype icons works, but not for dropbox :/

I just installed it from rpmfusion repo

I install it from the official page

I install it from the official page

Install from rpmfusion instead. Compiled against your distros versions.

already did it, telegram icon, skype icons works, but not for dropbox :/

Well, dropbox error then - and nobody can fix closed source blobs.

Except Dropbox itself of course.

Well, dropbox error then - and nobody can fix closed source blobs.

About telegram, reinstalled and it works now :)

I totally agree. I don't want to replace VMs. Containers are for an application level isolation. VMs are OS level isolation. The combination is actually more secure than using only one thing. And just to mention it, docker isn't the perfect container technology. There is also rkt, systemd-nspawn, …. The point is that you can replace VMs with containers, where it makes sense. On the other hand there are places where it makes no sense, so you shouldn't do it. Containers target applications are microservices. Services that previously run on the same host as one big application now splitted in multiple small applications with the ability to scale. Yes, I can spawn vm images of them and when I run them as microkernel that's pretty awesome and actually more secure than containers but are ugly to develop right now. You can also run them as full featured VMs, which is also working but provides a lot of overhead. Containers simplify maintainence and work pretty well as you can see around the world. And actually they are on their way to empower on VM isolation level. How? Check Linuxkit. They build a linux kernel + container. That's it. So minimal, so easy to handle and very robust. And it works on a virtual machine (like you usually get around AWS, Azure, GCE, …) as well as on self-hosted virtual hosts. because on one side you run the containers, on the other side you run it as VM build by linuxkit. The point is: They are neither on the isolation level of VMs nor are they totally insecure. It's pretty complicated to crash the host from inside a container when it's done right. Proof? Check Amazon, Google, … All the container providers have customers that have working machines. So there has to be a way to do it correctly, and I would wonder when they are not target of people who try to attack these machines.

Basically, containers are better than VMs in their own ways and in a lot of situations it will make more sense to use a VM than a container, when performance is a concern or you need more clients then you go for a container

The Fedora version of 404 :D

Does 4.14 kernel works fine for all? I got an black screen during booting. And works fine on 4.13 :/

Than use the 4.13 kernel and wait for the next kernel.

Does 4.14 kernel works fine for all? I got an black screen during booting. And works fine on 4.13 :/

Pretty much works for everyone, yes.

Are you using thirdparty modules like nvidia/broadcom or vbox?

nope, just clean installation

Is telegram X written by telegram itself? I’m confused with their last update announcement

Do i delete this app and install the other one?

Is telegram X written by telegram itself? I’m confused with their last update announcement

Nope. It's Open-Source, they merged it with official one.

https://telegram.org/blog/telegram-x

if i update this app, do i get the other one or at least the features of the other app?

nope, their different apps

codebase older on official Telegram, Telegram X comes with some experimental features enabled

it's better than the official one though, I'm using it and not disappointed

Telegram X really use less battery than Telegram (tested on iOS)

Haven't read this, but why not send

I won't tell if you don't http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2018/02/better-battery-life-on-fedora-linux

telegram already uses way less battery than whatsapp

telegram already uses way less battery than whatsapp

and less mobile data

I won't tell if you don't http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2018/02/better-battery-life-on-fedora-linux

lol I was about to forward that as well

lol I was about to forward that as well

lol so we all read omg! ubuntu

lol so we all read omg! ubuntu

Yeah, I'm subscribed to their channel as well. And t.me/fedoranews

Not me, I don’t like ubuntu

Not me, I don’t like ubuntu

I don't as well, but they have cool news

I feel they don’t test their packages thoroughly and they broke my system a few times with updates

Is telegram still pulled from the app store?

No

Not me, I don’t like ubuntu

don't like it too but i must admit omgubuntu is a great site :)

Telegram X really use less battery than Telegram (tested on iOS)

It uses more for me in Android

Some troubles with Telegram X, very contrast fonts at least

It uses more for me in Android

depends, if you have Samsung...true

depends, if you have Samsung...true

I have a Sony Z3C

GApps-less

hmm weird

ERROR: S client not available

Maybe because I don't have GCM

what android version?

So it falls back to websocket

what android version?

Tested on 7.1.2 and 8.1

Tested on 7.1.2 and 8.1

I'm not experiencing that on latest android 8.1 with security patches monthly

I'm not experiencing that on latest android 8.1 with security patches monthly

But do you have Google Services though?

But do you have Google Services though?

Google Play Services or Carrier Services?

Google Play Services or Carrier Services?

1st

yes, everyone has it

Umm, that's why

I don't

why?

you disabled it?

you disabled it?

I have a custom Lineage ROM without Google Play Services

Because I don't like tracking

Neither I do

I have a custom Lineage ROM without Google Play Services

ohh LineageOS

awesome

Lineage + Fdroid + Yalp for some needed app + Mozilla location services

yeah neither do I, that's why I disabled all forms of tracking from Google account settings privacy

Lineage + Fdroid + Yalp for some needed app + Mozilla location services

I use only GPS ?

But F-Droid and Yalp for apps

yeah neither do I, that's why I disabled all forms of tracking from Google account settings privacy

This is the funniest joke of 2018

Only gps for me is too slow ?

This is the funniest joke of 2018

True

Only gps for me is too slow ?

Mine takes less than 3-4 seconds to locate

And I was in Brussels for FOSDEM some days ago, worked the same

Here, depending where, it can be a little bit frustrating

before, it was saving my locations, searches on YouTube and Google search et.al. , but now there's no data there

before, it was saving my locations, searches on YouTube and Google search et.al. , but now there's no data there

That's what you think

Lol

But until you remove them completely