On Sat, 19 May 2018 20:49:45 +0200
Arnt Karlsen <arnt@???> ha wrote:
> On Sat, 19 May 2018 16:57:07 +0200, Alessandro wrote in message
> <20180519165707.504d5c33@???>:
>
> > On Sat, 19 May 2018 at 16:42:49 +0200
> > Arnt Karlsen <arnt@???> wrote:
> >
> > > On Sat, 19 May 2018 04:25:53 +0200, Alessandro wrote in message
> > > <20180519042553.7ba51256@???>:
> > >
> > >>> {headdesk}
> > >>>
> > >>> I really don't think it's that difficult to understand that
> > >>> avoiding outsourcing in no way precludes appropriate fallbacks
> > >>> and measures to eliminate SPoFs. I'm frankly quite puzzled that
> > >>> my mentioning (as an example) GitLab elicited the comment 'This
> > >>> wouldn't have helped [because] you need redundancy' -- when I
> > >>> nowhere suggested eschewing redundancy and when that open source
> > >>> project has a mountain of documentation on that very subject.
> > >>> And I'm puzzled a second time to see you ignore my having just
> > >>> pointed that out, as if I hadn't.
> > >>
> > >> You need redundancy in repository's admins, not on
> > >> infrastructure.
> > >
> > > ..you need both, IME. 17 years ago, I was the final lawful
> > > webmaster at fmb.no, our domain docs were stolen by
> > > https://www.frp.no/ people.
> >
> > Humm, how can infrastructure redundancy protect against document
> > stealth?
>
> ..theft, not stealth. Google those 2. ;o)
>
> > Infrastructure redundancy protects you against hardware
> > failure, not legal or bureaucratic events.
>
> ..that's your narrow view. Real infrastructure redundancy means
> setting up at least 2 fully independent web sites with at least
> 2 competing independent web hotels mirroring each other,
Web hosts, not hotels. Google those 2. ;o)
> and feed
> them content over rsync, scp etc from a master server on e.g. a
> cell phone.
As I already said, this does nothing against theft of documents or
the allegedly illegal transfer of an Internet domain name or hijack of a DNS
record.
> ..in our case, problem was time and funding to litigate the control
> of such legal or bureaucratic events. 4 hours before the "primary"
> ballot filing deadline, we were told we needed "5000 signatures" to
> file, truth is 500, we mobilized and got over 12,000 approved, despite
> having inch thick piles of signature sheets stolen from the 2 major
> Statoil gas stations south of Stavanger on Feb 28'th 2001.
Infrastructure redundancy does not protect you against such events, too.
All of these events in fact involved non ICT infrastructures.
> ..from then on, it was all sabotage, I took over as webmaster in late
> July/early August, and without said infrastructure control, we wound
> up with 688 votes.
Alessandro
::
Re: [DNG] Is Void OK? Was: Keep it …
