/srv/irclogs.ubuntu.com/2020/02/27/#ubuntu-discuss.txt

Psi-JackHmmm.. Now, evaluating KeePassXC and iOS options, if any exist yet that are viable.00:14
pragmaticenigmaTo my knowledge XC is uses the same file format as KeePassX (kdbx format) ... so I should think any are potential candidates... no?00:17
Psi-JackThey do use that format, newer versions of it. And there are /some/ options. Not always that good, specifically on the IOS side.00:17
Psi-Jacklike, there's Strongbox now. I don't recall that being a thing a few years ago.00:18
Psi-JackBut, you have to pay for some features of it, heavily, if you want it. Like syncing.,00:18
Psi-JackBy heavily, I mean up to ~$38 for a lifetime license.00:18
sixwheeledbeastKeePassium?00:19
Psi-JackHadn't tried that one yet.00:20
Psi-JackHeh, well, my old KeePassXC database still works. :)00:27
Psi-Jackkeepassium also has a lifetime license, but $27.00:28
Psi-JackDoesn't support TOTP though.00:38
Psi-JackStrongbox does. :)00:38
ducassei wish my phone supported nfc so i could use my yubikey to unlock my keepass db00:46
Psi-Jackheh00:51
Psi-JackWellll.. Hmmmm..00:53
Psi-JackThis approach is indeed, working so far... I think the main issue I had before was form fields not always being reliable.00:57
pragmaticenigmacause Cook and Jobs know better... you don't need form fields :-)01:00
pragmaticenigmayou just need a single button and an imagination01:00
Psi-JackWell I wouldn't mind SQRL being more popular. But I get it's so very new, still. :)01:00
pragmaticenigmaOh... the gibson and twit... if it never gets promoted anywhere... it's not really going to take off I fear01:01
Psi-JackWell, they need apps, first. Cross platform all over./01:03
Psi-JackAnd not just in beta. :)01:03
Psi-JackHmmm yeah..01:06
Psi-JackKeePassXC still failing form fields. In this easy example, AWS IAM login.01:07
Psi-JackOh boo! And the Alt+Shift+T they suggest is to fill in the TOTP, just opens the Tools menu option of Firefox. :/01:11
Psi-JackLooking more and more like Enpass, for me, is still the most viable solution.01:11
Psi-JackLacks a CLI tool, but with some work I could get that working again.01:11
lotuspsychjegood morning04:15
lotuspsychje!info stacer04:38
ubot5Package stacer does not exist in bionic04:38
lotuspsychjent0: dell has mostly good ubuntu support05:03
lotuspsychjent0: but every machine has hardware components inside, that possible 'could' trigger a bug on a specific kernel05:03
nt0aye--my worry awhile back was that my laptop didn't ship with an intel wifi chipset as in the developer editions (but i'm not really concerned about that)05:04
lotuspsychjeiwlwifi suffers some bugs lately on 5.0 and 5.3 kernels05:04
lotuspsychjerealtek can also be a pain, but that doesnt mean things cant be solved right05:04
nt0i'm not an expert but i'm pretty savvy with this sorta stuff--patched the source for a relatively new (at the time) usb-wifi card to enable monitor mode a year or so ago.  that's my proudest HW moment.05:05
nt05+ kernels have regressions in iwlwifi?05:06
lotuspsychjesome intel chipsets do yeah05:07
nt0i use gentoo on my main box (this one) but use ubuntu in a VM on my 9560 (which i continue to allow evil MS to exist on out of my own laziness) and recently helped a friend out with a fresh 19.10 install05:07
nt0tbh 19.10 was snappy/clean enough to cause me to think about using ubuntu again (i had forsaken it for various reasons) and now that i've read that the amazon cruft will no longer be default i'm back on board05:08
nt0bummer re: regressions.  i'll figure out which one i actually have and look into it.  thank you05:09
lotuspsychjei have both intel & realtek working on 20.04 here05:10
lotuspsychjekernel 5.4 currently05:10
Psi-JackHmmm.05:12
Psi-JackI'd noticed that Fedora 31 had no iwl issues. Just Intel HDA issues on 5.5.505:13
nt0pure curiosity: what causes bugs in HDA?  isn't that pretty much set in stone as a standard?05:18
nt0i can imagine hardware that might be on one side or the other of some expectation set by software05:19
nt0iirc HDA has been around for a long, long time now05:20
lotuspsychjei havent seen alot of audio bugs lately05:23
Psi-JackYeah. with many varations and bugs. LO05:59
lordievaderGood morning07:07
ducassegood morning07:41
code1o6Hi everyone, I followed this tutorial https://help.ubuntu.com/community/LiveCDCustomization . Unfortunately, my resulting iso doesn't have a partition table. I'm able to boot my image from KVM but not from a usb11:04
code1o6the only step I didn't follow was cdrecord as I used dd instead.11:06
code1o6is this the right place to ask?11:10
daftykinsnot really as, given the topic, it's not a support channel - #ubuntu or #ubuntu-server might be some use11:18
=== Ussat-1 is now known as Ussat
pragmaticenigmagiaco: dragonriver is already here too17:15
dragonrivergiaco, a lot of modern hardware has 4k physical sectors, which it presents as 512 byte logical sectors. By default, old luks format will set the sector to 512 bytes, so do 4 calls when only 1 is needed. You get much better performance.17:15
pragmaticenigmadragonriver: Do you mean the block would have 4k sectors? or is that per track on the drive?17:16
pragmaticenigmahow does the topology work?17:16
giacodragonriver: thanks for the info, but fdisk print shows 512 for all my disks. I'll keep the info for the future17:18
dragonriverpragmaticenigma, just the sector size on the disk, it doesn't have to do with the block size. I'm trying to find links, but can't right now.17:20
daftykins'Advanced Format'17:20
pragmaticenigmaso a sector is still a sector, now I see how you get the multiple trips then17:23
dragonriverYes. Most disks have hybrid advanced format 4k. It allows the disk to operate as having real sector size of 512 bytes, but in reality the sectors are 4k. In reality, the speedup isn't 4x, because the hdd controller is smarter than that, but it does have 4 times writing or checking the invisible crc that is on the 4k sector (invisible because that's handled internally by the hdd, not available to the OS.17:24
dragonriverThe only real difference between 512 and 4096 byte sector size is lower overhead on the error correction on the sector, which allows hdds to have slightly higher density.17:25
pragmaticenigmado most OSes detect this and leverage it? or is that something the user needs to configure on format to properly leverage?17:26
daftykinsbesides partition sector alignment, it's the controller's job17:26
giacoso it could be that the disk has sector 4k but it shows as 512 because the controller says that?17:28
giacofor controller, I mean the usb disk envelope17:28
pragmaticenigmaIf Wikipedia is to be believed: For hard disk drives working in the 4K native mode, there is no emulation layer in place, and the disk media directly exposes its 4096, 4112, 4160, or 4224-byte physical sector size to the system firmware and operating system.17:28
dragonriverpragmaticenigma, virtually no OS detects this, and most time it's impossible to detect. Some HP hardware does expose this information (not consumer, I'm talking serious server hardware).17:28
pragmaticenigmaIt sounds like I'd need to know the drive has this, and configure it when I go to format the disk?17:30
dragonriverOh. You can see the logical and physical sizes no problem. For example "Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 4096 bytes". What's hidden is the crc overhead that the sector has internally.17:32
pragmaticenigmaHow can "see" it then?17:39
dragonriverfor example, fdisk -l17:42
pragmaticenigmagiaco: Cool that you're taking steps on encrypting data at rest... do you have any concerns about the performance of the system though? with those being encrypted17:44
pragmaticenigmaah, okay... simple as that then17:44
pragmaticenigmathanks dragonriver17:44
dragonriverIn my experience encrypting the entire drive has very very low performance penalty, if your cpu has the aes instruction set. You can always run a benchmark with "cryptsetup benchmark" to see what type of penalty you can expect.17:51
pragmaticenigmaone of mine has a performance hit... but it has more to do with not enough RAM and the choice in drive encryption18:05
dragonriverYou will definitely feel a performance hit, especially for things like SQL workloads. But whole disk luks is less bad than fscrypt. See for example https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=ext4-crypto-418&num=318:16
dragonriverNotice that for workloads like compilation and nginx page serving the penalty is around 0%.18:17
pragmaticenigmayeah... this setup is a windows laptop, i7 gen 2 or 3, with 8 GB ram, using veracrypt... it works well enough, but it's going to get wiped soon, and I'll move to having an encrypted partition, and leave the OS unencrypted... first issue is veracrypt isn't steller, but that's all that I have presently found for the Windows side of the world18:19
dragonriververacrypt is very, very strong. You can setup deniable containers in files, the whole lot.18:21
pragmaticenigmayes, but FDE just doesn't seem like it is fully there18:22
pragmaticenigmaAs soon as anything starts swapping memory, I get a system crash... might be able to mitigate it by creating a partition for the windows swap file18:23
pragmaticenigmamight be another option18:23
dragonriverI remember you can. You could with the old one.18:23
pragmaticenigmadonofrio: please provide complete answers in the future. that was most unhelpful and confusing for the person that asked for help19:58
=== pauljw__ is now known as pauljw
=== hggdh is now known as hggdh-msft

Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!