> I'm pretty sure even OpenBSD packages OpenSSL in ports for third party software, since so many pieces of software basically require it and do not work with LibreSSL anymore.
Theo Buehler talked about the current status of LibreSSL compatibility at EuroBSDcon last week. To take some quotes:
“> 2000 OpenBSD ports link against libcrypto or libssl” [i.e., LibreSSL]
I do the same, except instead of xmodmap I use “setxkbmap -option compose:ralt” (plus a few other options) as described in the xkeyboard-config(7) manpage. It has some useful features: https://man.openbsd.org/xkeyboard-config.7
In the old days of ASCII several characters were heavily overloaded. On teletypes it was not unusual to create accented characters by typing ` or ' (which looked more like ´), then backspacing and typing a vowel, to get (e.g.) è or é. The same could be done with ~ to create ñ, if the tilde were high up like ˜, or with " to simulate an umlaut.
And of course there’s the overload of hyphen and minus, such that Unicode gave up and named U+002D “hyphen‐minus,” and created two separate characters U+2212 “minus” (−) and U+2010 “hyphen” (‐) to use in situations where the typography matters. Most fonts seem to use identical glyphs for hyphen‐minus and minus, but I’ve seen some that try to split the difference, giving hyphen‐minus a glyph with a height and width somewhere in between hyphen and minus.
If you find minus and hyphen‐minus hard to distinguish visually, just remember that a true minus sign looks just like a plus without the vertical part. Compare the alignments:
When that day comes, a machine running sshd on a high port will have to be wiped, because how can you trust that nobody’s scanned your ports, exploited your server, and eliminated the traces?
When an OpenSSH zero‐day gets released, you can bet your bottom dollar people will be scanning full port ranges for SSH servers. And only one of them has to find you.
If that’s the scenario you’re worried about, don’t rely on obscure ports. Run your sshd behind a VPN.
> You can maintain a .ssh/config file with all the port that you used (and backup it)
Once you start distributing config files to all your clients you might as well switch to keypair authentication, which so completely reduces risk of intrusion that leaving sshd on 22 simply does not matter.
The thesis of the article, that security through obscurity is underrated, is “because it has a low implementation cost and it usually works well.”
But I contest both of those things. Common obscurity methods provide low benefit for the amount of work put in, relative to methods with a better foundation.
One of the best examples of this is port knocking, a resurging fad in self‐hosting circles, that is completely beaten both in simplicity and in actual protection by putting your SSH server behind WireGuard.
Even the example in the article seems ridiculous. I always advocate disabling SSH passwords and using FIDO‐backed SSH keys instead, but of course people will complain that they lose the ability to log in from arbitrary machines (well worth it in my opinion, but fine). So rather than using SSH with a weak password on a non‐default port, why not use SSH with a strong password on a default port, which provides more entropy and also some protection against attacks by a local user, without having to remember weird port numbers?
The article mentions that two of her books (The House of Arden and The Railway Children) are being republished this fall. That said, her copyrights have expired, so they’re also available now as open‐source, public domain ebooks at Standard Ebooks: https://standardebooks.org/ebooks/e-nesbit
I was a big fan of Nesbit’s Psammead trilogy as a child: Five Children and It, The Phoenix and the Carpet, and The Story of the Amulet.
Star Wars is a particularly salient example because the original cuts that made the films such cultural icons are completely unavailable from anyone other than third‐party sellers, due to the wishes of the (former) rights holder. After the Special Editions were released, the theatrical editions made it onto DVD one time, and never did again. J.J. Abrams has indicated that there are difficulties behind the scenes (perhaps some clause in the Disney purchase) that prevent the originals from being made available for sale. So people who want to avoid the CGI and bad redubs of the Special Editions are stuck scrounging eBay, or more likely, grabbing an “unofficial” scan of the theatrical editions.
The article mentions GOG’s movie selection (which is indeed extremely limited: https://www.gog.com/en/movies). It’s worth pointing out that Vimeo also provides some DRM‐free digital downloads through its “On Demand” imprint (https://vimeo.com/ondemand/oxyana). Like GOG, though, it mostly contains works of a particular niche (in this case, documentaries and short films).
I’ve been hard‐pressed to find any other way to purchase DRM‐free movies.
Another commenter posted a source that mentions in passing that ISO 8601 was the result of a 1978 UN declaration that Monday should be the first day of the week. Now I wonder where that came from!
You’re not wrong that “the Sabbath day” has sometimes been used by Christians to refer to Sunday, but the context of this thread is that a comment claimed that calling Sunday the first day of the week is inconsistent with the Bible, and that’s plainly not true.
Thanks for the link. It had another interesting fact:
> In 1978, the UN recommended that Monday be made the first day of the week in most countries. It was established in 1988, according to ISO 8601, an international standard for exchange and communication of date and time-related data.
I’m really curious about why the UN made that decision. Is this the primary reason so many countries now consider Monday the first day?
I’m actually really interested in this. Clearly in Jesus’s time the Hebrew week went Sunday–Saturday. That definition remained at least for long enough to make into Ecclesiastical Latin and further into, e.g., Portuguese (segunda-feira, etc.). So why does ISO 8601 go Monday–Sunday? Was it codifying existing practice in Europe? When did that practice begin? Was America colonized before Europe switched to Monday–Sunday, or is America’s Sunday–Saturday a fundamentalist reversion to something more Biblically accurate?
> > What is agreed upon by near universal scholarly consensus is instead that Jesus was baptized and crucified.
> You're going to need an awful lot of citations there.
> Firstly, define the scholars you're referring to.
Not being OP, I’ll list at least John Dominic Crossan and James Dunn, who has said that the baptism and crucifixion of Jesus “command almost universal assent.”
Of course, I got those names from five minutes speed reading Wikipedia. But that’s two more scholars’ opinions of the scholarly consensus than you’ve provided.
> Also, what sources are they working from?
Surely this is the very definition of moving the goalposts. OP stated the scholarly consensus is that Jesus’s baptism and crucifixion are true (this, incidentally, was my existing impression of the scholarly consensus). Now you’re no longer just arguing that OP was wrong about that, but have moved on to claiming that any scholars and historians who believe in Jesus’s baptism are wrong because they have no reliable sources.
I have to admit, I’m not inclined to throw out my understanding of the scholarly consensus or which sources are reliable to argue the historicity of Jesus based on an unsourced Hacker News comment.