Regards,
George Toft
On 7/5/2024 5:43 AM,
techlists@phpcoderusa.com wrote:
>
>
>
> On 2024-07-05 00:23, George Toft wrote:
>> Had a chance to casually ask about the washed check thing today. Big
>> eye-roll. Police report. Affidavits. Close the checking account. Big
>> investigation. Sounds like a PITA.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> George Toft
>
> I just want to approach this in a way that I have reasonably safe bank
> transactions. I almost feel I need to learn cyber security.
>
> Thank you for all your feedback!!
>
BINGO!!! "Reasonably safe" is the fundamental goal post that we seek.
What is one's risk appetite for any endeavor? There is no such thing as
0% loss. Obviously 100% loss is a non-starter. So somewhere in between
is our goal. I won't beleaguer the list anymore, but this is the
fundamentals of risk analysis, which is what I do at work. An on-topic
example: In the not-Sudo solution we have, we discovered one application
that would not work with it. One app - 6 servers out of 50,000 servers.
Do I risk the 50,000 servers to make not-Sudo work on 6 when the
original configurator made a fundamental programming error? No - we
accept the risk. Actually, I'm now stuck with that misconfiguration
without executing a ton of regression testing which would take months
just to distill a reasonable test set, and my management isn't going to
support spending thousands of salary dollars on something this trivial.
Lastly, the 7 banks that own Zelle are getting hauled in to talk to
Congress about their "acceptable fraud rate." They cheerfully announce
they have less than 0.1% fraud rate. These huge banks don't care about
0.1% - that's acceptable. But if 0.1% of all e-mail you receive got
through the filters and infected your system, that becomes another story.
Peace.
>
>
>
>
>>
>> On 7/4/2024 3:14 PM, techlists@phpcoderusa.com wrote:
>>> Thanks George!! Lot s to think about.
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2024-07-04 14:23, George Toft wrote:
>>>> <scroll>
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>>
>>>> George Toft
>>>>
>>>> On 7/4/2024 6:50 AM, techlists@phpcoderusa.com wrote:
>>>>> Thank you so much George!!
>>>>>
>>>>> Another Question. I was a police officer in the 80's and 90's.
>>>>> During my tenure the bank was on the hook for any criminal acts as
>>>>> long as the customer was not negligent. I only dealt with this on
>>>>> a couple occasional.
>>>>>
>>>>> So If someone gets access to my online banking and I report it in
>>>>> a timely manner, or if someone washes one of my checks and I
>>>>> report it in a timely manner, is the bank on the hook or am I?
>>>>
>>>> There are a ton of rules with more acronyms than the IT world has.
>>>> I would love to tell you what I understand, but I'd be talking out
>>>> my ass.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> BTW I thought going old school was the most secure. I do not
>>>>> trust the Internet. My daily driver is a Linux Box and I do not
>>>>> use my cellular phone for anything except to talk and read some
>>>>> news. I am semiretired and have home officed for a long time.
>>>>
>>>> Not sure there is any magic incantation that I can say that would
>>>> put you at ease, other than "Risk Analysis," "Government
>>>> Regulation," "Audit and Reviews," "Compliance," "Controls and
>>>> Countermeasures," and "Fines." We have to comply with a bazillion
>>>> rules all designed to protect you, the bank customer. Some regions
>>>> are really strict and their governments show they really care, like
>>>> the EU - their rules are so restrictive. Here's an example: You
>>>> cannot log into a server that serves the EU if Payment Card
>>>> Information (PCI) is involved with the same user ID that you used
>>>> to log into your work station. This prevents lateral movement from
>>>> an insider attack should the attacker get an employee's credentials
>>>> or Kerberos TGT (Hey!!! It's now on-topic!!!) . This is just an
>>>> example. We have external inspectors and government auditors on
>>>> site almost every two weeks making us prove compliance with all the
>>>> rules, and the bigger we get, the more rules and more regulatory
>>>> auditors we get to talk to. We actually have two people on my team
>>>> of 27 whose job used to be project management, now is audit and
>>>> compliance. All of this to protect you.
>>>>
>>>> Let's not forget about the Security Operations Center monitoring
>>>> employee activities. Refer to the GTFOBins email from yesterday. I
>>>> documented a chained attack to get root based on that page, and the
>>>> SOC came knocking saying "George, we noticed suspicious activity on
>>>> this server and this date. Whatcha doin'?" Fortunately, I
>>>> documented everything and emailed it to my manager, so all I had to
>>>> do was forward that back to the SOC.
>>>>
>>>> Mail scares me. I had to send my LEA ID in recently via USPS. I'm
>>>> hoping they got it.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Any suggestions are appreciated.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 2024-07-03 21:48, George Toft wrote:
>>>>>> Sorry, Kieth, I have bad news for you. You took a 30+ year leap
>>>>>> backwards in security.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I can tell you for certain, from my bank fraud analyst friend
>>>>>> (just got promoted to financial crimes investigator), checks are
>>>>>> the second most insecure way of transferring money, first being
>>>>>> putting the money in the envelope. They helped the USPS bust a
>>>>>> fraud ring who worked in the Post Office - fraudsters were
>>>>>> pulling checks out of envelopes inside the local Post Office. My
>>>>>> friend pulled out all the details for the Postmaster General.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ACH is free (for you) and secure and guaranteed by the originator
>>>>>> as they are on the hook to prove the identity of who initiated
>>>>>> the transaction and they have to pay. It's all very complicated,
>>>>>> and I'm not going into details here.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I use ACH all the time. My physical devices have multi-layer
>>>>>> physical protection. Logical access control is in-place. Both
>>>>>> have multi-factor authentication. Password resets require
>>>>>> multi-factor authentication.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And the DoD is worse - their systems have so many layers, it was
>>>>>> easier to just let my account get deleted from lack of use and
>>>>>> rebuilt it from scratch. I have notes that tell me
>>>>>> screen-by-screen what to put in each box and which ones to
>>>>>> ignore. It's so secure, legitimate users can't even get in... and
>>>>>> this is just my health insurance.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Where all of this can break down - getting on topic - is with the
>>>>>> SSH protocol and web proxies. When you connect to a website using
>>>>>> HTTPS using a web proxy, your web browser uses it's cert to set
>>>>>> up the connection, or so it thinks. What's really happening is
>>>>>> the proxy is responding to the request and decrypting the
>>>>>> message, then it forms a new request and sends it to the bank,
>>>>>> which believes the proxy and sends it back. Everything gets
>>>>>> decrypted on the proxy, so whoever has admin access to the proxy
>>>>>> can see everything. Kinda like opening envelopes in the mail room
>>>>>> :) Disclaimer: This is what some networking guys told me in a
>>>>>> presentation about 10 years ago.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In summary, ACH is safe if you do it from home without a proxy.
>>>>>> Of course "safe" is relative, but it's safer than checks in the
>>>>>> mail. Drop into your bank and ask the branch manager, or call
>>>>>> their customer service and ask. They won't tell you checks are
>>>>>> bad, but they will steer you to ACH and tell you it's better.
>>>>>> Break out the Rosetta Stone and figure out what "better" means in
>>>>>> corporate-speak. Banks are in it to win it, and they don't offer
>>>>>> something for free unless they are saving money (cost avoidance)
>>>>>> on the alternatives.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> George Toft
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 7/3/2024 6:21 AM, techlists@phpcoderusa.com wrote:
>>>>>>> <scroll>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 2024-07-02 18:20, George Toft via PLUG-discuss wrote:
>>>>>>>> I work for a bank, and you would be amazed at how much security
>>>>>>>> is baked into the connecting your browser to their web servers.
>>>>>>>> Makes the NSA look like freshmen. And no, I'm not telling you
>>>>>>>> who I work for.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> George Toft
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'd like to hear more. The world is a hostile place. I recently
>>>>>>> went old school. I asked the bank to disarm my online banking.
>>>>>>> I now deal with paper statements and everything gets paid by
>>>>>>> check. Not as convenient as on-line banking, however I am hoping
>>>>>>> it makes my world a little bit more secure.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What are your thoughts?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Keith
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 6/29/2024 5:19 PM, Keith Smith via PLUG-discuss wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Mike,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The world is a hostile place. The more precautions you take
>>>>>>>>> the better. I cover the camera on my cellular phone while not
>>>>>>>>> in use. I cover the camera that is built into my laptop while
>>>>>>>>> it is not in use. I think on-line banking is dangerous. At
>>>>>>>>> some point I want to turn off WIFI and go to wired only on my
>>>>>>>>> local net.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> We lock our cars and houses for a reason.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I do not know as much security as I'd like, however it might
>>>>>>>>> be necessary at some point to to become more cyber.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> About 24 years ago the members of the Tucson Free Unix Group
>>>>>>>>> (TFUG) helped me build a server that I ran out of my home. We
>>>>>>>>> left the email relay open and I got exploited. About 10 years
>>>>>>>>> ago I became root and I accidentally overwrote my home
>>>>>>>>> directory. yikes... both were painful. The first example is a
>>>>>>>>> reason we must be more aware of what we are doing. The 2nd is
>>>>>>>>> an example why we should use sudo as much as we can instead of
>>>>>>>>> becoming root.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Keith
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 2024-06-29 08:55, Michael via PLUG-discuss wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> I just realized, while 99% of the people on this list are
>>>>>>>>>> honest there
>>>>>>>>>> is the diabolical 1%. So I guess I enter my password for the
>>>>>>>>>> rest of
>>>>>>>>>> my life. Or do you think that it really matters considering
>>>>>>>>>> this is
>>>>>>>>>> only a mailing list?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, Jun 29, 2024, 10:22 AM Michael <bmike1@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for saying this. I realized that I only needed to run
>>>>>>>>>>> apt as
>>>>>>>>>>> root. I didn't know how to make it so I could do that..... but
>>>>>>>>>>> chatgt did!
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, Jun 29, 2024, 5:53 AM Eric Oyen via PLUG-discuss
>>>>>>>>>>> <plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> NO WORRIES FROM THIS END RUSTY.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> As a general rule, I use sudo only for very specific tasks
>>>>>>>>>>>> (usually updating my development package tree on OS X) and no
>>>>>>>>>>>> where else will I run anything as root. I have seen what
>>>>>>>>>>>> happens
>>>>>>>>>>>> to linux machines that run infected binaries as root and it
>>>>>>>>>>>> can
>>>>>>>>>>>> get ugly pretty fast. In one case, I couldn’t take the machine
>>>>>>>>>>>> out of service because of other items I was involved with,
>>>>>>>>>>>> so I
>>>>>>>>>>>> simply made part of the dir tree immutable after replacing
>>>>>>>>>>>> a few
>>>>>>>>>>>> files in /etc. That would fill up the system logs with an
>>>>>>>>>>>> error
>>>>>>>>>>>> message about a specific binary trying to replace a small
>>>>>>>>>>>> number
>>>>>>>>>>>> of conf files. Once the offending binary was found, it made
>>>>>>>>>>>> things
>>>>>>>>>>>> easier trying to disable it or get rid of it. However, after a
>>>>>>>>>>>> while, I simply pulled the drive and ran it through a Dod
>>>>>>>>>>>> secure
>>>>>>>>>>>> erase and installed a newer linux bistro on it. I did use
>>>>>>>>>>>> the same
>>>>>>>>>>>> trick with chattr to make /bin, /sbin and /etc immutable. That
>>>>>>>>>>>> last turned out to be handy as I caught someone trying to
>>>>>>>>>>>> rootkit
>>>>>>>>>>>> my machine using a known exploit, only they couldn’t get it to
>>>>>>>>>>>> run because the binaries they wanted to replace couldn’t be
>>>>>>>>>>>> written to. :)Yes, this would be a bit excessive, but over the
>>>>>>>>>>>> long run, proved far less inconvenient than having to wipe and
>>>>>>>>>>>> reinstall an OS.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> -Eric
>>>>>>>>>>>> From the central Offices of the Technomage Guild, security
>>>>>>>>>>>> Applications Dept.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jun 28, 2024, at 6:43 PM, Rusty Carruth via PLUG-discuss
>>>>>>>>>>>> <plug-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> (Deep breath. Calm...)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I can't figure out how to respond rationally to the below, so
>>>>>>>>>>>> all I'm going to say is - before you call troll, you might
>>>>>>>>>>>> want
>>>>>>>>>>>> to research the author, and read a bit more carefully what
>>>>>>>>>>>> they
>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote. I don't believe I recommended any of the crazy
>>>>>>>>>>>> things you
>>>>>>>>>>>> suggest. And I certainly didn't intend to imply any of that.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On the other hand, it may not have been clear, so I'll
>>>>>>>>>>>>> just say
>>>>>>>>>>>> "Sorry that what I wrote wasn't clear, but english isn't my
>>>>>>>>>>>> first
>>>>>>>>>>>> language. Unfortunately its the only one I know".
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> And on that note, I'll shut up.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/26/24 15:05, Ryan Petris wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I feel like you're trolling so I'm not going to spend
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> very much
>>>>>>>>>>>> time on this.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's been a generally good security practice for at least
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>> last 25+ years to not regularly run as a privileged user,
>>>>>>>>>>>> requiring some sort of escalation to do administrative-type
>>>>>>>>>>>> tasks.
>>>>>>>>>>>> By using passwordless sudo, you're taking away that
>>>>>>>>>>>> escalation.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Why not just run as root? Then you don't need sudo at all. In
>>>>>>>>>>>> fact, why even have a password at all? Why encrypt? Why
>>>>>>>>>>>> don't you
>>>>>>>>>>>> just put all your data on a publicly accessible FTP server and
>>>>>>>>>>>> just grab stuff when you need it? The NSA has all your data
>>>>>>>>>>>> anyway
>>>>>>>>>>>> and you don't have anything to hide so why not just leave
>>>>>>>>>>>> it out
>>>>>>>>>>>> there for the world to see?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As for something malicious needing to be written to use
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sudo,
>>>>>>>>>>>> why wouldn't it? sudo is ubiquitous on unix systems; if it
>>>>>>>>>>>> didn't
>>>>>>>>>>>> at least try then that seams like a pretty dumb malicious
>>>>>>>>>>>> script
>>>>>>>>>>>> to me.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You also don't necessarily need to open/run something for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it to
>>>>>>>>>>>> run. IIRC there was a recent image vulnerability in Gnome's
>>>>>>>>>>>> tracker-miner application which indexes files in your home
>>>>>>>>>>>> directory. And before you say that wouldn't happen in KDE,
>>>>>>>>>>>> it too
>>>>>>>>>>>> has a similar program, I believe called Baloo.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> There also exists the recent doas program and the systemd
>>>>>>>>>>>> replacement run0 to do the same.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Jun 26, 2024, at 12:23 PM, Rusty Carruth via
>>>>>>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Actually, I'd like to start a bit of a discussion on this.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> First, I know that for some reason RedHat seems to think
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>>>> sudo is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bad/insecure.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'd like to know the logic there, as I think the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> argument FOR
>>>>>>>>>>>> using sudo
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is MUCH stronger than any argument I've heard (which,
>>>>>>>>>>>> admittedly, is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pretty close to zero) AGAINST it. Here's my thinking:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Allowing users to become root via sudo gives you:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - VERY fine control over what programs a user can use as
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> root
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - The ability to remove admin privs (ability to run as
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> root)
>>>>>>>>>>>> from an
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> individual WITHOUT having to change root password
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> everywhere.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Now, remember, RH is supposedly 'corporate friendly'. As a
>>>>>>>>>>>> corporation,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that 2nd feature is well worth the price of admission,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> PLUS I
>>>>>>>>>>>> can only
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> allow certain admins to run certain programs? Very nice.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So, for example, at my last place I allowed the 'tester'
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> user
>>>>>>>>>>>> to run
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fdisk as root, because they needed to partition the disk
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> under
>>>>>>>>>>>> test. In
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> my case, and since the network that we ran on was totally
>>>>>>>>>>>> isolated from
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the corporate network, I let fdisk be run without needing a
>>>>>>>>>>>> password.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Oh, and if they messed up and fdisk'ed the boot
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> partition, it
>>>>>>>>>>>> was no big
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> deal - I could recreate the machine from scratch (minus
>>>>>>>>>>>> whatever data
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hadn't been copied off yet - which would only be their most
>>>>>>>>>>>> recent run),
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in 10 minutes (which was about 2 minutes of my time, and 8
>>>>>>>>>>>> minutes of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> scripted 'dd' ;-) However, if the test user wanted to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> become
>>>>>>>>>>>> root using
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> su, they had to enter the test user password.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So, back to the original question - setting sudo to not
>>>>>>>>>>>> require a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> password. We should have asked, what program do you
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> want to
>>>>>>>>>>>> run as root
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> without requiring a password? How secure is your system?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What
>>>>>>>>>>>> else do
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you use it for? Who has access? etc, etc, etc.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> There's one other minor objection I have to the 'zero
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> defense'
>>>>>>>>>>>> statement
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> below - the malicious thing you downloaded (and, I
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> assume ran)
>>>>>>>>>>>> has to be
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> written to USE sudo in its attempt to break in, I
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> believe, or
>>>>>>>>>>>> it
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wouldn't matter HOW open your sudo was. (simply saying
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 'su -
>>>>>>>>>>>> myscript'
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> won't do it).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And, if you're truly paranoid about stuff you download, you
>>>>>>>>>>>> should:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1 - NEVER download something you don't have an excellent
>>>>>>>>>>>> reason to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> believe is 'safe', and ALWAYS make sure you actually
>>>>>>>>>>>> downloaded it from
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> where you thought you did.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2 - For the TRULY paranoid, have a machine you use to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> download
>>>>>>>>>>>> and test
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> software on, which you can totally disconnect from your
>>>>>>>>>>>> network (not
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> JUST the internet), and which has NO confidential info, and
>>>>>>>>>>>> which you
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> can erase and rebuild without caring. Run the downloaded
>>>>>>>>>>>> stuff there,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for a long time, until you're pretty sure it won't bite
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3 - For the REALLY REALLY paranoid, don't download anything
>>>>>>>>>>>> from
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anywhere, disconnect from the internet permanently, get
>>>>>>>>>>>> high-tech locks
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for your doors, and wrap your house in a faraday cage!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And probably don't leave the house....
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The point of number 3 is that there is always a risk, even
>>>>>>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 'well-known' software, and as someone else said - they're
>>>>>>>>>>>> watching you
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anyway. The question is how 'safe' do you want to be?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And how
>>>>>>>>>>>> paranoid
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are you, really?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Wow, talk about rabbit hole! ;-)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 'Let the flames begin!' :-)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/25/24 18:50, Ryan Petris via PLUG-discuss wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wanted sudo not to require a password.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please reconsider this... This is VERY BAD security
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> practice.
>>>>>>>>>>>> There's basically zero defense if you happen to download/run
>>>>>>>>>>>> something malicious.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jun 25, 2024, at 6:01 PM, Michael via PLUG-discuss
>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> then I remember that a PLUG member mentioned ChatGPT
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> being
>>>>>>>>>>>> good at troubleshooting so I figured I'd give it a go. I
>>>>>>>>>>>> sprint
>>>>>>>>>>>> about half an hour asking it the wrong question but after
>>>>>>>>>>>> that it
>>>>>>>>>>>> took 2 minutes. I wanted sudo not to require a password. it is
>>>>>>>>>>>> wonderful! now I don't have to bug you guys. so it looks
>>>>>>>>>>>> like this
>>>>>>>>>>>> is the end of the user group unless you want to talk about OT
>>>>>>>>>>>> stuff.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- :-)~MIKE~(-:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> settings:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list: PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> settings:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list: PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list: PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list: PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
>>>>>>>>>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
>>>>>>>>>>>> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>>>>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list: PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
>>>>>>>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
>>>>>>>>>> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>>>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list: PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
>>>>>>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
>>>>>>>>> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list: PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
>>>>>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
>>>>>>>> https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
---------------------------------------------------
PLUG-discuss mailing list:
PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
https://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
(text/plain)