• 0 Posts
  • 147 Comments
Joined 3 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 6th, 2023

help-circle








  • Lets ignore the “is it possible” and imagine what would happen if it was. Whatever entity forks AOSP would start off with (next to) no userbase. The platform “Android” will remain Google’s AOSP, including some proprietary components. Whenever Google decides, they can enforce apps on the Google Play Store to use a new version of the Android system API. This is often a breaking change; apps that update won’t work on older Android. There is nothing stopping Google from creating complex breaking changes that tie into their proprietary components, killing off any attempt at running Google Play Store apps on older or “fully FOSS” Android. Even if a hard fork of AOSP existed, it would not remain compatible with the vast majority of applications.

    So even if this could happen, it won’t. Nobody is going to invest in hard forking a project that is going to be killed off by Google’s monopoly.

    The much better (long term) option is to stay completely outside AOSP, like with mobile Linux distros such as postmarketOS. Right now, it is underdeveloped and not an option as a daily driver for most. But over time, this is the only feasible option that can give control back to the user.




  • Assuming this is malware, depending on the complexity it might be really hard to remove. The best course of action is much like on Windows; Backup your personal files, figure out how the malware got on your PC (so you can avoid it next time), then reinstall the operating system.

    For backing up personal files, stick to documents, media, etc. Do not include executables (like installed games), and be very careful with config files (and system files), basically only back these up if you know what’s in them is legitimate.

    You can find more about the process in the /proc/4212/ directory (this is the number on the left in top). By running ls -l, you should be able to see where the exe symlink points to, which tells you where the program is installed. This might give you a clue as to where it came from (or it might not, depending on how the malware is made). If you suspect it is not malware, due to information on your system, look it up online before trusting it. I have personally never seen a root-owned ““windows”” process, which is why I’m heavily leaning towards this being malware.

    If you feel like you know where the malware came from, or you’re stuck and are struggling to find out more, you should reinstall your operating system to get rid of the malware. Malware can have different levels of complexity, what you’re seeing on the surface might be the whole thing, or it could have more complex systems to reinstall itself after removal. Which is why reinstalling your operating system is the safer option.






  • What I’m noticing more, is that you can keep a consistent 11.4MB/s, this feels relatively close to what you’d usually pull through a 100mbit/s link (after accounting for overhead). If that’s the case, it shouldn’t matter how the NFS client decides to chunk the data, for how much throughput there is to the NAS. Which means you’re looking at a broken NFS server that can’t handle large single transmissions.

    If it’s not the case, and you’ve got a faster network link, it seems that the NAS just can’t keep up when given >2gb at once. That could be a hardware resource limitation, where this fix is probably the best you can do without upgrading hardware. If it’s not a resource limitation, then the NFS server is misbehaving when sent large chunks of data.

    Basically, if your network itself (like switches, cables) isn’t broken, you’re either dealing with a NAS that is severely underspecced for what it’s supposed to do, or a broken NFS server.

    Another possibility for network issues, is that your proxmox thinks it has gigabit (or higher), but some device or cable in between your server and NAS limits speed to 100mbit/s. I think it’d be likely to cause the specific issues you’re seeing, and something like mixed cable speeds would explain why the issue is so uncommon/hard to find. The smaller buffers more frequent acknowledgements would sidestep this.

    Do note I am also not an expert in NFS, I’m mostly going off experience with the “fuck around and find out” method.



  • Iirc, the XZ backdoor was specifically targeting RH and Debian, which for some reason link libsystemd into OpenSSH. Afaik even upstream Arch was unaffected, not just Artix. The exploit code, though non-functional, still made its way onto your system (assuming you updated when it was in a release version).

    I’m not defending systemd though, it’s clear that Poettering’s goals do not align with the rest of the Linux community. I’m saying that Artix not being affected by the XZ backdoor is not a good argument for why to use Artix or avoid systemd.

    It’s like saying “Linux doesn’t get malware” because most desktop malware targets the OS with the largest desktop userbase, Windows. This alone doesn’t suddenly make Linux “better”. That doesn’t mean there aren’t other reasons to avoid Windows.


  • The smaller/newer distros have no evidence of staying around for years, so it’s hard to judge whether they’ll be around in another couple years. Distros like Bazzite are definitely interesting, but you can’t reliably predict whether it’ll get updates in 10 years. There are stable community-led distros that have been around for a long time, like Debian.