Help, observations and vulnerabilities of GhostBSD 11.1 BETA

[ernbsd]

Hello community!

It's a nice system but there are imperfections like:

1. The system presents some vulnerabilities and cannot be corrected either by the graphical update tool or by pkg update && pkg upgrade commands, for some reason the system is not built by ports.


2. The system only detects the android phone device disc as virgin and does not detect the same androi device that is SmartPhone

3. The system swallows up a lot of memory, 86.6% of 1 GB, how to proceed to solve the exposed? Thank.

[ASX]

Please stop trolling!

What you are using to troll is a beta release, no one in their sane mind would use alpha or beta software if security is a real concern. But if you want to ridiculize yourself, please go on.

The system swallows up a lot of memory, 86.6% of 1 GB, how to proceed to solve the exposed?

There is nothing to solve, evidently.

[ernbsd]

Please stop trolling!

What you are using to troll is a beta release, no one in their sane mind would use alpha or beta software if security is a real concern. But if you want to ridiculize yourself, please go on.

There is nothing to solve, evidently.

To the open topics for help of solutions and corrections, you only know to say trolling, the image shown and the open theme does not have anything of trolling, and for something there is the CD Live ISO alpha or BETA in GhostBSD, to go testing and giving solutions to the bugs or excessive consumption of RAM memory and among other vulnerabilities that the newly installed system presents.

[ASX]

You have to understand one thing first:

pre-release ISO are made available for those who are able and want to contribute back their findings about mistkaes, bugs and so on. As any alpha/beta/rc release they are unsupported and that is usually true for every distribution out there, not only GhostBSD. Pre-release ISO exists for testing purpose only and are implicitly self supported.

Additionally, if no one responded to your , may be there is a reason ... wether you see it or not.

for something there is the CD Live ISO alpha or BETA in GhostBSD, to go testing and giving solutions to the bugs

yeah, agree. Where are your proposed solutions ?

excessive consumption of RAM memory

and with that assertion, again, you show that you don't know what you are talking about.
A good OS will use as much RAM as possible, believe it or not.

There is a good talking this week on distrowatch, about supporting 32bit OSes or not, the comment section is full of comments some intelligent, some very idiot. But one took my attention, it was from someone who said "hardware makers should stop to produce and sell system with less than 5 GB RAM"

Beside the arguable 5 GB (better rounded to 8 GB), he has a point.

[NevilleGoddard]

You say

2 . The system only detects the android phone device disc as virgin and does not detect the same androi device that is SmartPhone
end quote

I’m not sure what you mean. GhostBSD can see my android smartphone just fine. Also, what vulnerabilities are you talking about exactly?

[ernbsd]

You have to understand one thing first:

pre-release ISO are made available for those who are able and want to contribute back their findings about mistkaes, bugs and so on. As any alpha/beta/rc release they are unsupported and that is usually true for every distribution out there, not only GhostBSD. Pre-release ISO exists for testing purpose only and are implicitly self supported.
Additionally, if no one responded to your , may be there is a reason ... wether you see it or not.

for something there is the CD Live ISO alpha or BETA in GhostBSD, to go testing and giving solutions to the bugs

yeah, agree. Where are your proposed solutions ?

excessive consumption of RAM memory

and with that assertion, again, you show that you don't know what you are talking about.

A good OS will use as much RAM as possible, believe it or not.

As I said before, alpha or Beta ISO are publicly available on their pages so that they can test the system and report bugs and vulnerabilities of the new ISO version under construction to their administrators. As is the case with most of the distributions that are published on the DistroWatch page, so that users can test the system of the new BETA version of the ISO, and report errors and vulnerabilities to their administrators.

The administrators or assistants are in charge of correcting or guiding the user to correct the vulnerabilities presented by the system in the new version of BETA, that's what I do, informand and of the BETA system in which it is located, seeking help in the community of these forums to correct vulnerabilities and imperfections of the system.
Excessive consumption of RAM memory at 86.6% of 1 GB, understanding that the BSD family is compatible with most older 32-bit architecture equipment that has less RAM memory.

I’m not sure what you mean. GhostBSD can see my android smartphone just fine. Also, what vulnerabilities are you talking about exactly?

Watch carefully to each of the images presented inside the main image, and on the desktop of the screen is a red arrow pointing to the Blank Disc that only detects the SmartPhone as Blank Disc and nothing else without being able to do anything, besides in the other window of information of the system, you look down where it throws the multiple vulnerabilities of the system that is exposed with the pkg audit -F command.

These are the vulnerabilities that the system presents in BETA:

# uname -a

Code: Select all

FreeBSD pc.ghostbsd-pc.home 11.1-RC3 FreeBSD 11.1-RC3 #0 r320976: Fri Jul 14 02:20:44 UTC 2017     root@releng2.nyi.freebsd.org:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC  amd64
#

# pkg audit -F

Code: Select all

python27-2.7.13_7 is vulnerable:
Python 2.7 -- multiple vulnerabilities
CVE: CVE-2017-9233
CVE: CVE-2016-9063
CVE: CVE-2016-5300
CVE: CVE-2016-4472
CVE: CVE-2016-0718
CVE: CVE-2012-0876
WWW: https://vuxml.FreeBSD.org/freebsd/9164f51e-ae20-11e7-a633-009c02a2ab30.html

xorg-server-1.18.4_3,1 is vulnerable:
xorg-server -- multiple vulnabilities
CVE: CVE-2017-13723
CVE: CVE-2017-13721
WWW: https://vuxml.FreeBSD.org/freebsd/4f8ffb9c-f388-4fbd-b90f-b3131559d888.html

curl-7.55.1 is vulnerable:
cURL -- out of bounds read
CVE: CVE-2017-1000254
WWW: https://vuxml.FreeBSD.org/freebsd/ccace707-a8d8-11e7-ac58-b499baebfeaf.html

firefox-55.0.3_1,1 is vulnerable:
mozilla -- multiple vulnerabilities
CVE: CVE-2017-7825
CVE: CVE-2017-7824
CVE: CVE-2017-7823
CVE: CVE-2017-7822
CVE: CVE-2017-7821
CVE: CVE-2017-7820
CVE: CVE-2017-7819
CVE: CVE-2017-7818
CVE: CVE-2017-7817
CVE: CVE-2017-7816
CVE: CVE-2017-7815
CVE: CVE-2017-7814
CVE: CVE-2017-7813
CVE: CVE-2017-7812
CVE: CVE-2017-7811
CVE: CVE-2017-7810
CVE: CVE-2017-7805
CVE: CVE-2017-7793
WWW: https://vuxml.FreeBSD.org/freebsd/1098a15b-b0f6-42b7-b5c7-8a8646e8be07.html

perl5-5.24.2 is vulnerable:
perl -- multiple vulnerabilities
CVE: CVE-2017-12883
CVE: CVE-2017-12837
CVE: CVE-2017-12814
WWW: https://vuxml.FreeBSD.org/freebsd/d9e82328-a129-11e7-987e-4f174049b30a.html

libraw-0.18.2_1 is vulnerable:
libraw -- Out-of-bounds Read
CVE: CVE-2017-14608
WWW: https://vuxml.FreeBSD.org/freebsd/02bee9ae-c5d1-409b-8a79-983a88861509.html

libraw-0.18.2_1 is vulnerable:
libraw -- denial of service and remote code execution
CVE: CVE-2017-14265
WWW: https://vuxml.FreeBSD.org/freebsd/4cd857d9-26d2-4417-b765-69701938f9e0.html

libraw-0.18.2_1 is vulnerable:
libraw -- buffer overflow
CVE: CVE-2017-14348
WWW: https://vuxml.FreeBSD.org/freebsd/d9f96741-47bd-4426-9aba-8736c0971b24.html

thunderbird-52.3.0_1 is vulnerable:
mozilla -- multiple vulnerabilities
CVE: CVE-2017-7825
CVE: CVE-2017-7824
CVE: CVE-2017-7823
CVE: CVE-2017-7822
CVE: CVE-2017-7821
CVE: CVE-2017-7820
CVE: CVE-2017-7819
CVE: CVE-2017-7818
CVE: CVE-2017-7817
CVE: CVE-2017-7816
CVE: CVE-2017-7815
CVE: CVE-2017-7814
CVE: CVE-2017-7813
CVE: CVE-2017-7812
CVE: CVE-2017-7811
CVE: CVE-2017-7810
CVE: CVE-2017-7805
CVE: CVE-2017-7793
WWW: https://vuxml.FreeBSD.org/freebsd/1098a15b-b0f6-42b7-b5c7-8a8646e8be07.html

7 problem(s) in the installed packages found.
# 

[ASX]

I'm one that try to be reasonable, and because of that I was suggesting a "gradual" dismissal of i386 arch, but reading post like yours make me feel very wrong, and make me think about to drop support of i386 immediately!