lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <aa8acbe7fa340ed9841cf69f92f388502ff8d9ff.camel@physik.fu-berlin.de> Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2023 23:33:42 +0100 From: John Paul Adrian Glaubitz <glaubitz@...sik.fu-berlin.de> To: Dan Williams <dcbw@...hat.com>, Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org> Cc: linux-m68k <linux-m68k@...ts.linux-m68k.org>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: Does anyone use Appletalk? On Wed, 2023-11-01 at 15:27 -0500, Dan Williams wrote: > But... Time Machine debuted with 10.5 and AppleTalk got removed in > 10.6; did the actual TimeCapsules ever support AppleTalk, or were they > always TCP/IP-based? netatalk has two actively maintained versions, one for AppleTalk (2.2.x series) and one for TCP/IP (3.x series). Both are still being developed and supported [1]. > (also TimeMachine-capable Airport Extremes [A1354] are like $15 on > eBay; that's cheaper than a Raspberry Pi) I know that commercial entities don't have interest in legacy architectures and protocols. But Linux isn't a commercial-only project so legacy applications have a valid use case. Most people in the Linux community don't have a use case for IBM mainframes, yet they aren't in sending patches to get s390 support removed. I understand that sometimes old code needs to be dropped when it becomes a burden which is why I also agreed to drop ia64 support since I have heard complaints from multiple upstream projects and I also know that a lot of stuff there is broken with no one willing to fix it. But I don't understand the removal in this case. What particular burden does a legacy networking protocol pose if it can be easily disabled at compile time to reduce the attack surface? > This patch only removes the Linux-side ipddp driver (eg MacIP) so if > Time Capsules never supported AppleTalk, this patch is unrelated to > TimeMachine. > > What this patch *may* break is Linux as a MacIP gateway, allowing > AppleTalk-only machines to talk TCP/IP to systems. But that's like > what, the 128/512/Plus and PowerBook Duo/1xx? Everything else had a > PDS/NuBus slot or onboard Ethernet and could do native > MacTCP/OpenTransport... Which is a valid use case for people from the retro-computing community as can be seen from the netatalk description above. I don't think that Arnd reached out to the netatalk project and asked whether the code is still needed, did he? Adrian > [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netatalk -- .''`. John Paul Adrian Glaubitz : :' : Debian Developer `. `' Physicist `- GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546 0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913
Powered by blists - more mailing lists