[sf-lug] SF-LUG meeting note for Monday November 20, 2017

Bobbie Sellers bliss-sf4ever at dslextreme.com
Wed Nov 22 17:27:29 PST 2017

On 11/22/2017 04:44 PM, Rick Moen wrote:
> Quoting Bobbie Sellers (bliss-sf4ever at dslextreme.com):
>> The Dell is running the PCLinuxOS64 KDE5 and is fully updated at that
>> time to kernel 4.13.14.  This is now running on the 700 Gibibyte hard
>> drive from my toasted Pavilion and with the 8 Gigabyte sodimm added it
>> is up to 12 Gibibytes.
> Win!  That's even enough RAM for KDE.  ;->

     Exactly but it might do better with 16! Sadly beyond my present means.

> Well Maestro got into it about a casual remark I had made
> that  some isos that I download are problematic in that the
> checksums given by the uploaders do not match.
> Thank you for caring about file download integrity.  I continue to vet
> the sha256sums (or prior hash types where those are used), but honestly
> can't even remember when a garbled download was last an issue -- except
> of course for incomplete downloads.  And the way you prevent those is to
> use 'wget -c' (or --continue) and run it a second time to make sure.

     The up-loaders with no easy means of contact are the real cause.  
Maybe they just want to cause chaos.

>> He was trying to remotely do the checksum before downloading.
> If Maestro is claiming that the ISO already doesn't match its listed
> checksum value at the download site, that would indeed be a big problem,
> but calculating a fresh checksum _on_ the download site (what I guess
> you're talking about) would require that Maestro have login (e.g., ssh)
> access there, which isn't going to be the case.  Moreover, that ignores
> the larger question of _why_ the ISO doesn't match the listed checksum,
> which you certainly would want to solve before trusting the ISO to be
> correct, complete, and not security-compromised.

     No he is not trying to replace the checksum given but to check the 
iso before downloading.
      Apparently this is possible but...
>> I despite the fact that the download may be bad prefer
>> to check the download once it is on my hard disk.
> Doing that is the only possible way to accomplish the purpose of the
> checksum, to verify that your download was complete and uncorrupted.
         And that is my position. Even if someone manages to get the 
checksum verified before downloading
that does not mean that your download will be complete and accurate.

     Bobbie Sellers

More information about the sf-lug mailing list