[Unit]
Description=Beeps when in emergency or rescue mode
DefaultDependencies=false
StopWhenUnneeded=true
[Install]
WantedBy=emergency.target rescue.target
[Service]
Type=simple
ExecStart=/bin/sh -ec 'while true; do /usr/bin/aplay -q /tmp/beep.wav; sleep 2; done'

• .service: daemons
• .socket: communication sockets
• .device: hardware devices
• .mount: mount points
• .automount: automounting
• .swap: swap files or partitions
• .target: only dependencies, like Debian metapackages
• .path: inotify monitoring of paths
• .timer: cron-like activation
• .slice: group processes for common resource management
• .scope: group processes for common resource management

• /lib/systemd/system/: for units provided by packaged software
• /run/systemd/system/: runtime-generated units
• /etc/systemd/system/: for units provided by systemd administrators

• /lib/systemd/system/beep.service.d/foo.conf can be used to tweak the contents of /lib/systemd/system/beep.service, so it is possible for a package to distribute a tweak to the configuration of another package.
• /etc/systemd/system/beep.service.d/foo.conf can be used to tweak the contents of /lib/systemd/system/beep.service, so it is possible a system administrator to extend a packaged unit without needing to replace it entirely.

• Introduction to systemd.
• systemd on the Debian Wiki
• systemd on the Arch Wiki

Many voices arise now and then against risks linked to the Github use by Free Software projects. Yet the infatuation for the collaborative forge of the Octocat Californian start-ups doesn t seem to fade away.

These recent years, Github and its services take an important role in software engineering as they are seen as easy to use, efficient for a daily workload with interesting functions in enterprise collaborative workflow or amid a Free Software project. What are the arguments against using its services and are they valid? We will list them first, then we ll examine their validity.

1. Critical points

1.1 Centralization

The Github application belongs to a single entity, Github Inc, a US company which manage it alone. So, a unique company under US legislation manages the access to most of Free Software application code sources, which may be a problem with groups using it when a code source is no longer available, for political or technical reason.

The Octocat, the Github mascot

This centralization leads to another trouble: as it obtained critical mass, it becomes more and more difficult not having a Github account. People who don t use Github, by choice or not, are becoming a silent minority. It is now fashionable to use Github, and not doing so is seen as out of date . The same phenomenon is a classic, and even the norm, for proprietary social networks (Facebook, Twitter, Instagram).

1.2 A Proprietary Software

When you interact with Github, you are using a proprietary software, with no access to its source code and which may not work the way you think it is. It is a problem at different levels. First, ideologically, but foremost in practice. In the Github case, we send them code we can control outside of their interface. We also send them personal information (profile, Github interactions). And mostly, Github forces any project which goes through the US platform to use a crucial proprietary tools: its bug tracking system.

Windows, the epitome of proprietary software, even if others took the same path

1.3 The Uniformization

Working with Github interface seems easy and intuitive to most. Lots of companies now use it as a source repository, and many developers leaving a company find the same Github working environment in the next one. This pervasive presence of Github in free software development environment is a part of the uniformization of said developers working space.

Uniforms always bring Army in my mind, here the Clone army

2 Critical points cross-examination

2.1 Regarding the centralization

2.1.1 Service availability rate

As said above, nowadays, Github is the main repository of Free Software source code. As such it is a favorite target for cyberattacks. DDOS hit it in March and August 2015. On December 15, 2015, an outage led to the inaccessibility of 5% of the repositories. The same occurred on November 15. And these are only the incident reported by Github itself. One can imagine that the mean outage rate of the platform is underestimated.

2.1.2 Chain reaction could block Free Software development

Today many dependency maintenance tools, as npm for javascript, Bundler for Ruby or even pip for Python can access an application source code directly from Github. Free Software projects getting more and more linked and codependents, if one component is down, all the developing process stop.

One of the best examples is the npmgate. Any company could legally demand that Github take down some source code from its repository, which could create a chain reaction and blocking the development of many Free Software projects, as suffered the Node.js community from the decisions of Npm, Inc, the company managing npm.

2.2 A historical precedent: SourceForge

Github didn t appear out of the blue. In his time, its predecessor, SourceForge, was also extremely popular.

Heavily centralized, based on strong interaction with the community, SourceForge is now seen as an aging SAAS (Software As A Service) and sees most of its customers fleeing to Github. Which creates lots of hurdles for those who stayed. The Gimp project suffered from spams and terrible advertising, which led to the departure of the VLC project, then from installers corrupted with adwares instead of the official Gimp installer for Windows. And finally, the Project Gimp s SourceForge account was hacked by SourceForge team itself!

These are very recent examples of what can do a commercial entity when it is under its stakeholders pressure. It is vital to really understand what it means to trust them with data and exchange centralization, where it could have tremendous repercussion on the day-to-day life and the habits of the Free Software and open source community.

2.3. Regarding proprietary software

2.3.1 One community, several opinions on proprietary software

Mostly based on ideology, this point deals with the definition every member of the community gives to Free Software and open source. Mostly about one thing: is it viral or not? Or GPL vs MIT/BSD.

Those on the side of the viral Free Software will have trouble to use a proprietary software as this last one shouldn t even exist. It must be assimilated, to quote Star Trek, as it is a connected black box, endangering privacy, corrupting for profit our uses and restrain our freedom to use as we re pleased what we own, etc.

Those on the side of complete freedom have no qualms using proprietary software as their very existence is a consequence of freedom without restriction. They even agree that code they developed may be a part of proprietary software, which is quite a common occurrence. This part of the Free Software community has no qualm using Github, which is well within their ideology parameters. Just take a look at the Janson amphitheater during Fosdem and check how many Apple laptops running on macOS are around.

FreeBSD, the main BSD project under the BSD license

2.3.2 Data loss and data restrictions linked to proprietary software use

Even without ideological consideration, and just focusing on Github infrastructure, the bug tracking system is a major problem by itself.

Bug report builds the memory of Free Software projects. It is the entrance point for new contributors, the place to find bug reporting, requests for new functions, etc. The project history can t be limited only to the code. It s very common to find bug reports when you copy and paste an error message in a search engine. Not their historical importance is precious for the project itself, but also for its present and future users.

Github gives the ability to extract bug reports through its API. What would happen if Github is down or if the platform doesn t support this feature anymore? In my opinion, not that many projects ever thought of this outcome. How could they move all the data generated by Github into a new bug tracking system? One old example now is Astrid, a TODO list bought by Yahoo a few years ago. Very popular, it grew fast until it was closed overnight, with only a few weeks for its users to extract their data. It was only a to-do list. The same situation with Github would be tremendously difficult to manage for several projects if they even have the ability to deal with it. Code would still be available and could still live somewhere else, but the project memory would be lost. A project like Debian has today more than 800,000 bug reports, which are a data treasure trove about problems solved, function requests and where the development stand on each. The developers of the Cpython project have anticipated the problem and decided not to use Github bug tracking systems.

Issues, the Github proprietary bug tracking system

Another thing we could lose if Github suddenly disappear: all the work currently done regarding the push requests (aka PRs). This Github function gives the ability to clone one project s Github repository, to modify it to fit your needs, then to offer your own modification to the original repository. The original repository s owner will then review said modification, and if he or she agrees with them will fuse them into the original repository. As such, it s one of the main advantages of Github, since it can be done easily through its graphic interface.

However reviewing all the PRs may be quite long, and most of the successful projects have several ongoing PRs. And this PRs and/or the proprietary bug tracking system are commonly used as a platform for comment and discussion between developers.

Code itself is not lost if Github is down (except one specific situation as seen below), but the peer review works materialized in the PRs and the bug tracking system is lost. Let s remember than the PR mechanism let you clone and modify projects and then generate PRs directly from its proprietary web interface without downloading a single code line on your computer. In this particular case, if Github is down, all the code and the work in progress is lost. Some also use Github as a bookmark place. They follow their favorite projects activity through the Watch function. This technological watch style of data collection would also be lost if Github is down.

Debian, one of the main Free Software projects with at least a thousand official contributors

2.4 Uniformization

The Free Software community is walking a thigh rope between normalization needed for an easier interoperability between its products and an attraction for novelty led by a strong need for differentiation from what is already there.

Github popularized the use of Git, a great tool now used through various sectors far away from its original programming field. Step by step, Git is now so prominent it s almost impossible to even think to another source control manager, even if awesome alternate solutions, unfortunately not as popular, exist as Mercurial.

A new Free Software project is now a Git repository on Github with README.md added as a quick description. All the other solutions are ostracized? How? None or very few potential contributors would notice said projects. It seems very difficult now to encourage potential contributors into learning a new source control manager AND a new forge for every project they want to contribute. Which was a basic requirement a few years ago. It s quite sad because Github, offering an original experience to its users, cut them out of a whole possibility realm. Maybe Github is one of the best web versioning control systems. But being the main one doesn t let room for a new competitor to grow. And it let Github initiate development newcomers into a narrow function set, totally unrelated to the strength of the Git tool itself.

3. Centralization, uniformization, proprietary software What s next? Laziness?

Fight against centralization is a main part of the Free Software ideology as centralization strengthens the power of those who manage it and who through it control those who are managed by it. Uniformization allergies born against main software companies and their wishes to impose a closed commercial software world was for a long time the main fuel for innovation thirst and intelligent alternative development. As we said above, part of the Free Software community was built as a reaction to proprietary software and their threat. The other part, without hoping for their disappearance, still chose a development model opposite to proprietary software, at least in the beginning, as now there s more and more bridges between the two.

The Github effect is a morbid one because of its consequences: at least centralization, uniformization, proprietary software usage as their bug tracking system. But some years ago the Dear Github buzz showed one more side effect, one I ve never thought about: laziness. For those who don t know what it is about, this letter is a complaint from several spokespersons from several Free Software projects which demand to Github team to finally implement, after years of polite asking, new functions. Since when Free Software project facing a roadblock request for clemency and don t build themselves the path they need? When Torvalds was involved in the Bitkeeper problem and the Linux kernel development team couldn t use anymore their revision control software, he developed Git. The mere fact of not being able to use one tool or functions lacking is the main motivation to seek alternative solutions and, as such, of the Free Software movement. Every Free Software community member able to code should have this reflex. You don t like what Github offers? Switch to Gitlab. You don t like it Gitlab? Improve it or make your own solution.

The Gitlab logo

Let s be crystal clear. I ve never said that every Free Software developers blocked should code his or her own alternative. We all have our own priorities, and some of us even like their beauty sleep, including me. But, to see that this open letter to Github has 1340 names attached to it, among them some spokespersons for major Free Software project showed me that need, willpower and strength to code a replacement are here. Maybe said replacement will be born from this letter, it would be the best outcome of this buzz.

In the end, Github usage is just another example of Internet usage massification. As Internet users are bound to go to massively centralized social network as Facebook or Twitter, developers are following the same path with Github. Even if a large fraction of developers realize the threat linked this centralized and proprietary organization, the whole community is following this centralization and uniformization trend. Github service is useful, free or with a reasonable price (depending on the functions you need) easy to use and up most of the time. Why would we try something else? Maybe because others are using us while we are savoring the convenience? The Free Software community seems to be quite sleepy to me.

The lion enjoying the hearth warm

About Me Carl Chenet, Free Software Indie Hacker, founder of the French-speaking Hacker News-like Journal du hacker. Follow me on social networks

• My Mastodon account : @carlchenet
• My Diaspora* account : @carlchenet
• My Twitter account : @carl_chenet

Translated from French by St phanie Chaptal. Original article written in 2015.

This post by Dirk Eddelbuettel originated on his Thinking inside the box blog. Please report excessive re-aggregation in third-party for-profit settings.

• Antoine Beaupr did 16h.
• Ben Hutchings did 10 hours (out of 15h allocated + 1 extra hour, thus keeping 6 extra hour for September).
• Chris Lamb did 18 hours.
• Emilio Pozuelo Monfort did 20.5 hours (out of 20.25 hours allocated + 13 hours remaining, thus keeping 12.75 hours for September).
• Guido G nther did 10 hours.
• Hugo Lefeuvre did 14h (out of 2h allocated + 12 extra hours).
• Lucas Kanashiro did 20.25 hours.
• Markus Koschany did 20.25 hours.
• Ola Lundqvist did 9h (out of 14h allocated + 16 extra hours, he gave back 14 hours, thus keeping 7 extra hours for September).
• Rapha l Hertzog did 12 hours.
• Roberto C. Sanchez did 27.25 hours (out of 20.25 hours allocated + 16 hours remaining, thus keeping 9 extra hours for September).
• Thorsten Alteholz did 20.25 hours.

• Platinum sponsors:
• TOSHIBA (for 22 months)
• GitHub (for 13 months)
• Gold sponsors:
• The Positive Internet (for 38 months)
• Blablacar (for 37 months)
• Linode (for 27 months)
• Babiel GmbH (for 16 months)
• Plat Home (for 16 months)
• Silver sponsors:
• Domeneshop AS (for 37 months)
• Universit Lille 3 (for 37 months)
• Trollweb Solutions (for 35 months)
• Nantes M tropole (for 32 months)
• Dalenys (for 28 months)
• Univention GmbH (for 23 months)
• Universit Jean Monnet de St Etienne (for 23 months)
• Sonus Networks (for 17 months)
• UR Communications BV (for 12 months)
• maxcluster GmbH (for 11 months)
• Exonet B.V. (for 7 months)
• Leibniz Rechenzentrum
• Bronze sponsors:
• David Ayers IntarS Austria (for 38 months)
• Evolix (for 38 months)
• Offensive Security (for 38 months)
• Seznam.cz, a.s. (for 38 months)
• Freeside Internet Service (for 37 months)
• MyTux (for 37 months)
• Intevation GmbH (for 35 months)
• Linuxhotel GmbH (for 35 months)
• Daevel SARL (for 33 months)
• Bitfolk LTD (for 32 months)
• Megaspace Internet Services GmbH (for 32 months)
• NUMLOG (for 32 months)
• Greenbone Networks GmbH (for 31 months)
• WinGo AG (for 31 months)
• Ecole Centrale de Nantes LHEEA (for 27 months)
• Sig-I/O (for 24 months)
• Entr ouvert (for 22 months)
• Adfinis SyGroup AG (for 19 months)
• GNI MEDIA (for 14 months)
• Quarantainenet BV (for 14 months)
• RHX Srl (for 11 months)
• Bearstech (for 5 months)
• LiHAS (for 5 months)
• People Doc
• Catalyst IT Ltd

No comment Liked this article? Click here. My blog is Flattr-enabled.

Changes in version 0.2.0 (2017-09-07)

• Added support for building on Windows
• Upgraded to MsgPack 2.1.5 (#3)
• New R functions to manipulate MsgPack objects: msgpack_format, msgpack_map, msgpack_pack, msgpack_simplify, mgspack_unpack (#4)
• New R functions also available as msgpackFormat, msgpackMap, msgpackPack, msgpackSimplify, mgspackUnpack (#4)
• New vignette (#4)
• New tests (#4)

This post by Dirk Eddelbuettel originated on his Thinking inside the box blog. Please report excessive re-aggregation in third-party for-profit settings.

conn V2-1
  left        = 2001:db8:1::1
  leftsubnet  = 2001:db8:a1::/64
  right       = 2001:db8:2::1
  rightsubnet = 2001:db8:a2::/64
  authby      = psk
  auto        = route

$ ip xfrm policy
src 2001:db8:a1::/64 dst 2001:db8:a2::/64
        dir out priority 399999 ptype main
        tmpl src 2001:db8:1::1 dst 2001:db8:2::1
                proto esp reqid 4 mode tunnel
src 2001:db8:a2::/64 dst 2001:db8:a1::/64
        dir fwd priority 399999 ptype main
        tmpl src 2001:db8:2::1 dst 2001:db8:1::1
                proto esp reqid 4 mode tunnel
src 2001:db8:a2::/64 dst 2001:db8:a1::/64
        dir in priority 399999 ptype main
        tmpl src 2001:db8:2::1 dst 2001:db8:1::1
                proto esp reqid 4 mode tunnel
[ ]

• a direction (out, in or fwd²),
• a selector (source subnet, destination subnet, protocol, ports),
• a mode (transport or tunnel),
• an encapsulation protocol (esp or ah), and
• the endpoint source and destination addresses.

$ ip xfrm state
src 2001:db8:1::1 dst 2001:db8:2::1
        proto esp spi 0xc1890b6e reqid 4 mode tunnel
        replay-window 0 flag af-unspec
        auth-trunc hmac(sha256) 0x5b68[ ]8ba2904 128
        enc cbc(aes) 0x8e0e377ad8fd91e8553648340ff0fa06
        anti-replay context: seq 0x0, oseq 0x0, bitmap 0x00000000
[ ]

$ tcpdump -pni eth0 -c2 -s0 esp
13:07:30.871150 IP6 2001:db8:1::1 > 2001:db8:2::1: ESP(spi=0xc1890b6e,seq=0x222)
13:07:30.872297 IP6 2001:db8:2::1 > 2001:db8:1::1: ESP(spi=0xcf2426b6,seq=0x204)

conn V1-1-to-V2-1
  left        = 2001:db8:1::1
  leftsubnet  = 2001:db8:a1::/64,2001:db8:a6::cc:1/128,2001:db8:a6::cc:5/128
  right       = 2001:db8:2::1
  rightsubnet = 2001:db8:a2::/64,2001:db8:a6::/64,2001:db8:a8::/64
  authby      = psk
  keyexchange = ikev2
  auto        = route

1. Routing daemons can be used to distribute routes to be protected by the VPN. This decreases the administrative burden when many subnets are present on each side.
2. Encapsulation and decapsulation can be executed in a different routing instance or namespace. This enables a clean separation between a private routing instance (where VPN users are) and a public routing instance (where VPN endpoints are).

Route-based VPN on Juniper Before looking at how to achieve that on Linux, let s have a look at the way it works with a JunOS-based platform (like a Juniper vSRX). This platform as long-standing history of supporting route-based VPNs (a feature already present in the Netscreen ISG platform). Let s assume we want to configure the IPsec VPN from V3-2 to V1-1. First, we need to configure the tunnel interface and bind it to the private routing instance containing only internal routes (with IPv4, they would have been RFC 1918 routes):

interfaces  
    st0  
        unit 1  
            family inet6  
                address 2001:db8:ff::7/127;
             
         
     
 
routing-instances  
    private  
        instance-type virtual-router;
        interface st0.1;
     
 

The second step is to configure the VPN:

security  
    /* Phase 1 configuration */
    ike  
        proposal IKE-P1  
            authentication-method pre-shared-keys;
            dh-group group20;
            encryption-algorithm aes-256-gcm;
         
        policy IKE-V1-1  
            mode main;
            proposals IKE-P1;
            pre-shared-key ascii-text "d8bdRxaY22oH1j89Z2nATeYyrXfP9ga6xC5mi0RG1uc";
         
        gateway GW-V1-1  
            ike-policy IKE-V1-1;
            address 2001:db8:1::1;
            external-interface lo0.1;
            general-ikeid;
            version v2-only;
         
     
    /* Phase 2 configuration */
    ipsec  
        proposal ESP-P2  
            protocol esp;
            encryption-algorithm aes-256-gcm;
         
        policy IPSEC-V1-1  
            perfect-forward-secrecy keys group20;
            proposals ESP-P2;
         
        vpn VPN-V1-1  
            bind-interface st0.1;
            df-bit copy;
            ike  
                gateway GW-V1-1;
                ipsec-policy IPSEC-V1-1;
             
            establish-tunnels on-traffic;
         
     
 

We get a route-based VPN because we bind the st0.1 interface to the VPN-V1-1 VPN. Once the VPN is up, any packet entering st0.1 will be encapsulated and sent to the 2001:db8: 1::1 endpoint. The last step is to configure BGP in the private routing instance to exchange routes with the remote site:

routing-instances  
    private  
        routing-options  
            router-id 1.0.3.2;
            maximum-paths 16;
         
        protocols  
            bgp  
                preference 140;
                log-updown;
                group v4-VPN  
                    type external;
                    local-as 65003;
                    hold-time 6;
                    neighbor 2001:db8:ff::6 peer-as 65001;
                    multipath;
                    export [ NEXT-HOP-SELF OUR-ROUTES NOTHING ];
                 
             
         
     
 

The export filter OUR-ROUTES needs to select the routes to be advertised to the other peers. For example:

policy-options  
    policy-statement OUR-ROUTES  
        term 10  
            from  
                protocol ospf3;
                route-type internal;
             
            then  
                metric 0;
                accept;
             
         
     
 

The configuration needs to be repeated for the other peers. The complete version is available on GitHub. Once the BGP sessions are up, we start learning routes from the other sites. For example, here is the route for 2001:db8: a1::/64:

> show route 2001:db8:a1::/64 protocol bgp table private.inet6.0 best-path
private.inet6.0: 15 destinations, 19 routes (15 active, 0 holddown, 0 hidden)
+ = Active Route, - = Last Active, * = Both
2001:db8:a1::/64   *[BGP/140] 01:12:32, localpref 100, from 2001:db8:ff::6
                      AS path: 65001 I, validation-state: unverified
                      to 2001:db8:ff::6 via st0.1
                    > to 2001:db8:ff::14 via st0.2

It was learnt both from V1-1 (through st0.1) and V1-2 (through st0.2). The route is part of the private routing instance but encapsulated packets are sent/received in the public routing instance. No route-leaking is needed for this configuration. The VPN cannot be used as a gateway from internal hosts to external hosts (or vice-versa). This could also have been done with JunOS security policies (stateful firewall rules) but doing the separation with routing instances also ensure routes from different domains are not mixed and a simple policy misconfiguration won t lead to a disaster.

Route-based VPN on Linux Starting from Linux 3.15, a similar configuration is possible with the help of a virtual tunnel interface³. First, we create the private namespace:

# ip netns add private
# ip netns exec private sysctl -qw net.ipv6.conf.all.forwarding=1

Any private interface needs to be moved to this namespace (no IP is configured as we can use IPv6 link-local addresses):

# ip link set netns private dev eth1
# ip link set netns private dev eth2
# ip netns exec private ip link set up dev eth1
# ip netns exec private ip link set up dev eth2

Then, we create vti6, a tunnel interface (similar to st0.1 in the JunOS example):

# ip tunnel add vti6 \
   mode vti6 \
   local 2001:db8:1::1 \
   remote 2001:db8:3::2 \
   key 6
# ip link set netns private dev vti6
# ip netns exec private ip addr add 2001:db8:ff::6/127 dev vti6
# ip netns exec private sysctl -qw net.ipv4.conf.vti6.disable_policy=1
# ip netns exec private sysctl -qw net.ipv4.conf.vti6.disable_xfrm=1
# ip netns exec private ip link set vti6 mtu 1500
# ip netns exec private ip link set vti6 up

The tunnel interface is created in the initial namespace and moved to the private one. It will remember its original namespace where it will process encapsulated packets. Any packet entering the interface will temporarily get a firewall mark of 6 that will be used only to match the appropriate IPsec policy⁴ below. The kernel sets a low MTU on the interface to handle any possible combination of ciphers and protocols. We set it to 1500 and let PMTUD do its work. We can then configure strongSwan⁵:

conn V3-2
  left        = 2001:db8:1::1
  leftsubnet  = ::/0
  right       = 2001:db8:3::2
  rightsubnet = ::/0
  authby      = psk
  mark        = 6
  auto        = route
  keyexchange = ikev2
  keyingtries = %forever
  ike         = aes256gcm16-prfsha384-ecp384!
  esp         = aes256gcm16-prfsha384-ecp384!
  mobike      = no

The IKE daemon configures the following policies in the kernel:

$ ip xfrm policy
src ::/0 dst ::/0
        dir out priority 399999 ptype main
        mark 0x6/0xffffffff
        tmpl src 2001:db8:1::1 dst 2001:db8:3::2
                proto esp reqid 1 mode tunnel
src ::/0 dst ::/0
        dir fwd priority 399999 ptype main
        mark 0x6/0xffffffff
        tmpl src 2001:db8:3::2 dst 2001:db8:1::1
                proto esp reqid 1 mode tunnel
src ::/0 dst ::/0
        dir in priority 399999 ptype main
        mark 0x6/0xffffffff
        tmpl src 2001:db8:3::2 dst 2001:db8:1::1
                proto esp reqid 1 mode tunnel
[ ]

Those policies are used for any source or destination as long as the firewall mark is equal to 6, which matches the mark configured for the tunnel interface. The last step is to configure BGP to exchange routes. We can use BIRD for this:

router id 1.0.1.1;
protocol device  
   scan time 10;
 
protocol kernel  
   persist;
   learn;
   import all;
   export all;
   merge paths yes;
 
protocol bgp IBGP_V3_2  
   local 2001:db8:ff::6 as 65001;
   neighbor 2001:db8:ff::7 as 65003;
   import all;
   export where ifname ~ "eth*";
   preference 160;
   hold time 6;
 

Once BIRD is started in the private namespace, we can check routes are learned correctly:

$ ip netns exec private ip -6 route show 2001:db8:a3::/64
2001:db8:a3::/64 proto bird metric 1024
        nexthop via 2001:db8:ff::5  dev vti5 weight 1
        nexthop via 2001:db8:ff::7  dev vti6 weight 1

The above route was learnt from both V3-1 (through vti5) and V3-2 (through vti6). Like for the JunOS version, there is no route-leaking between the private namespace and the initial one. The VPN cannot be used as a gateway between the two namespaces, only for encapsulation. This also prevent a misconfiguration (for example, IKE daemon not running) from allowing packets to leave the private network. As a bonus, unencrypted traffic can be observed with tcpdump on the tunnel interface:

$ ip netns exec private tcpdump -pni vti6 icmp6
tcpdump: verbose output suppressed, use -v or -vv for full protocol decode
listening on vti6, link-type LINUX_SLL (Linux cooked), capture size 262144 bytes
20:51:15.258708 IP6 2001:db8:a1::1 > 2001:db8:a3::1: ICMP6, echo request, seq 69
20:51:15.260874 IP6 2001:db8:a3::1 > 2001:db8:a1::1: ICMP6, echo reply, seq 69

You can find all the configuration files for this example on GitHub. The documentation of strongSwan also features a page about route-based VPNs.

---

1. Everything in this post should work with Libreswan.
2. fwd is for incoming packets on non-local addresses. It only makes sense in transport mode and is a Linux-only particularity.
3. Virtual tunnel interfaces (VTI) were introduced in Linux 3.6 (for IPv4) and Linux 3.12 (for IPv6). Appropriate namespace support was added in 3.15. KLIPS, an alternative out-of-tree stack available since Linux 2.2, also features tunnel interfaces.
4. The mark is set right before doing a policy lookup and restored after that. Consequently, it doesn t affect other possible uses (filtering, routing). However, as Netfilter can also set a mark, one should be careful for conflicts.
5. The ciphers used here are the strongest ones currently possible while keeping compatibility with JunOS. The documentation for strongSwan contains a complete list of supported algorithms as well as security recommendations to choose them.

Requirements:

• Synology NAS running DSM >= 6.0
• Sub/domain name with ability to update DNS records
• SSH access to your Synology NAS

DSM: Control Panel > Security > Certificates > Add

Add a new certificate > Get a certificate from Let's Encrypt

Name: SynoCommunity
Location: http://packages.synocommunity.com

DSM: Control Panel > Application Portal > Reverse Proxy > Create

/usr/syno/etc/certificate/_archive/

drwx------ 2 root root 4096 Sep 10 12:57 JeRh3Y

johndoe/freenode:password

• XMPP chatroom
• email: tails-dev@boum.org (public) or tails@boum.org (private)

1. Install the build dependencies:

   sudo apt install \
       git \
       rake \
       libvirt-daemon-system \
       dnsmasq-base \
       ebtables \
       qemu-system-x86 \
       qemu-utils \
       vagrant \
       vagrant-libvirt \
       vmdebootstrap && \
   sudo systemctl restart libvirtd
   

2. Ensure your user is in the relevant groups:

   for group in kvm libvirt libvirt-qemu ; do
      sudo adduser "$(whoami)" "$group"
   done
   

3. Logout and log back in to apply the new group memberships.

git clone https://git-tails.immerda.ch/tails && \
cd tails && \
git checkout 3.2-alpha2 && \
git submodule update --init && \
rake build

sudo apt install apt-show-versions && \
(
  for f in /etc/issue /proc/cpuinfo
  do
    echo "--- File: $ f  ---"
    cat "$ f "
    echo
  done
  for c in free locale env 'uname -a' '/usr/sbin/libvirtd --version' \
            'qemu-system-x86_64 --version' 'vagrant --version'
  do
    echo "--- Command: $ c  ---"
    eval "$ c "
    echo
  done
  echo '--- APT package versions ---'
  apt-show-versions qemu:amd64 linux-image-amd64:amd64 vagrant \
                    libvirt0:amd64
)   bzip2 > system-info.txt.bz2

bzless system-info.txt.bz2

• set Category to Build system;
• paste the output of rake build;
• attach system-info.txt.bz2 (this will publish that file).

sha512sum tails-amd64-3.2~alpha2.iso

9b4e9e7ee7b2ab6a3fb959d4e4a2db346ae322f9db5409be4d5460156fa1101c23d834a1886c0ce6bef2ed6fe378a7e76f03394c7f651cc4c9a44ba608dda0bc

1. Install diffoscope version 83 or higher and all the packages it recommends. For example, if you're using Debian Stretch:

   sudo apt remove diffoscope && \
   echo 'deb http://ftp.debian.org/debian stretch-backports main' \
       sudo tee /etc/apt/sources.list.d/stretch-backports.list && \
   sudo apt update && \
   sudo apt -o APT::Install-Recommends="true" \
            install diffoscope/stretch-backports
   

2. Download the official Tails 3.2~alpha2 ISO image.
3. Compare the official Tails 3.2~alpha2 ISO image with yours:

   diffoscope \
          --text diffoscope.txt \
          --html diffoscope.html \
          --max-report-size 262144000 \
          --max-diff-block-lines 10000 \
          --max-diff-input-lines 10000000 \
          path/to/official/tails-amd64-3.2~alpha2.iso \
          path/to/your/own/tails-amd64-3.2~alpha2.iso
   bzip2 diffoscope. txt,html 
   

4. Send an email to tails-dev@boum.org (public) or tails@boum.org (private) with the subject "Reproduction of Tails 3.2~alpha2 failed", attaching:
   • system-info.txt.bz2;
   • the smallest file among diffoscope.txt.bz2 and diffoscope.html.bz2, except if they are larger than 100 KiB, in which case better upload the file somewhere (e.g. share.riseup.net and share the link in your email.

Context aka. Sections This is probably the most relevant of the three proposals. Consider a bunch of related functions, say analyseExpr and analyseAlt, like these:

analyseExpr :: Expr -> Expr
analyseExpr (Var v) = change v
analyseExpr (App e1 e2) =
  App (analyseExpr e1) (analyseExpr e2)
analyseExpr (Lam v e) = Lam v (analyseExpr flag e)
analyseExpr (Case scrut alts) =
  Case (analyseExpr scrut) (analyseAlt <$> alts)
analyseAlt :: Alt -> Alt
analyseAlt (dc, pats, e) = (dc, pats, analyseExpr e)

You have written them, but now you notice that you need to make them configurable, e.g. to do different things in the Var case. You thus add a parameter to all these functions, and hence an argument to every call:

type Flag = Bool
analyseExpr :: Flag -> Expr -> Expr
analyseExpr flag (Var v) = if flag then change1 v else change2 v
analyseExpr flag (App e1 e2) =
  App (analyseExpr flag e1) (analyseExpr flag e2)
analyseExpr flag (Lam v e) = Lam v (analyseExpr (not flag) e)
analyseExpr flag (Case scrut alts) =
  Case (analyseExpr flag scrut) (analyseAlt flag <$> alts)
analyseAlt :: Flag -> Alt -> Alt
analyseAlt flag (dc, pats, e) = (dc, pats, analyseExpr flag e)

I find this code problematic. The intention was: flag is a parameter that an external caller can use to change the behaviour of this code, but when reading and reasoning about this code, flag should be considered constant. But this intention is neither easily visible nor enforced. And in fact, in the above code, flag does change , as analyseExpr passes something else in the Lam case. The idiom is indistinguishable from the environment idiom, where a locally changing environment (such as variables in scope ) is passed around. So we are facing exactly the same problem as when reasoning about a loop in an imperative program with mutable variables. And we (pure functional programmers) should know better: We cherish immutability! We want to bind our variables once and have them scope over everything we need to scope over! The solution I d like to see in Haskell is common in other languages (Gallina, Idris, Agda, Isar), and this is what it would look like here:

type Flag = Bool
section (flag :: Flag) where
  analyseExpr :: Expr -> Expr
  analyseExpr (Var v) = if flag then change1 v else change2v 
  analyseExpr (App e1 e2) =
    App (analyseExpr e1) (analyseExpr e2)
  analyseExpr (Lam v e) = Lam v (analyseExpr e)
  analyseExpr (Case scrut alts) =
    Case (analyseExpr scrut) (analyseAlt <$> alts)
  analyseAlt :: Alt -> Alt
  analyseAlt (dc, pats, e) = (dc, pats, analyseExpr e)

Now the intention is clear: Within a clearly marked block, flag is fixed and when reasoning about this code I do not have to worry that it might change. Either all variables will be passed to change1, or all to change2. An important distinction! Therefore, inside the section, the type of analyseExpr does not mention Flag, whereas outside its type is Flag -> Expr -> Expr. This is a bit unusual, but not completely: You see precisely the same effect in a class declaration, where the type signature of the methods do not mention the class constraint, but outside the declaration they do. Note that idioms like implicit parameters or the Reader monad do not give the guarantee that the parameter is (locally) constant. More details can be found in the GHC proposal that I prepared, and I invite you to raise concern or voice support there. Curiously, this problem must have bothered me for longer than I remember: I discovered that seven years ago, I wrote a Template Haskell based implementation of this idea in the seal-module package!

Less parentheses 1: Bulleted argument lists The next two proposals are all about removing parentheses. I believe that Haskell s tendency to express complex code with no or few parentheses is one of its big strengths, as it makes it easier to visualy parse programs. A common idiom is to use the $ operator to separate a function from a complex argument without parentheses, but it does not help when there are multiple complex arguments. For that case I propose to steal an idea from the surprisingly successful markup language markdown, and use bulleted lists to indicate multiple arguments:

foo :: Baz
foo = bracket
          some complicated code
          that is evaluated first
          other complicated code for later
          even more complicated code

I find this very easy to visually parse and navigate. It is actually possible to do this now, if one defines ( ) = id with infixl 0 . A dedicated syntax extension (-XArgumentBullets) is preferable:

• It only really adds readability if the bullets are nicely vertically aligned, which the compiler should enforce.
• I would like to use $ inside these complex arguments, and multiple operators of precedence 0 do not mix. (infixl -1 would help).
• It should be possible to nest these, and distinguish different nesting levers based on their indentation.

Less parentheses 1: Whitespace precedence The final proposal is the most daring. I am convinced that it improves readability and should be considered when creating a new language. As for Haskell, I am at the moment not proposing this as a language extension (but could be convinced to do so if there is enough positive feedback). Consider this definition of append:

(++) :: [a] -> [a] -> [a]
[]     ++ ys = ys
(x:xs) ++ ys = x : (xs++ys)

Imagine you were explaining the last line to someone orally. How would you speak it? One common way to do so is to not read the parentheses out aloud, but rather speak parenthesised expression more quickly and add pauses otherwise. We can do the same in syntax!

(++) :: [a] -> [a] -> [a]
[]   ++ ys = ys
x:xs ++ ys = x : xs++ys

The rule is simple: A sequence of tokens without any space is implicitly parenthesised. The reaction I got in Oxford was horror and disgust. And that is understandable we are very used to ignore spacing when parsing expressions (unless it is indentation, of course. Then we are no longer horrified, as our non-Haskell colleagues are when they see our code). But I am convinced that once you let the rule sink in, you will have no problem parsing such code with ease, and soon even with greater ease than the parenthesised version. It is a very natural thing to look at the general structure, identify compact chunks of characters , mentally group them, and then go and separately parse the internals of the chunks and how the chunks relate to each other. More natural than first scanning everything for ( and ), matching them up, building a mental tree, and then digging deeper. Incidentally, there was a non-programmer present during my presentation, and while she did not openly contradict the dismissive groan of the audience, I later learned that she found this variant quite obvious to understand and more easily to read than the parenthesised code. Some FAQs about this:

• What about an operator with space on one side but not on the other? I d simply forbid that, and hence enforce readable code.
• Do operator sections still require parenthesis? Yes, I d say so.
• Does this overrule operator precedence? Yes! a * b+c == a * (b+c).
• What is a token? Good question, and I am not not decided. In particular: Is a parenthesised expression a single token? If so, then (Succ a)+b * c parses as ((Succ a)+b) * c, otherwise it should probably simply be illegal.
• Can we extend this so that one space binds tighter than two spaces, and so on? Yes we can, but really, we should not.
• This is incompatible with Agda s syntax! Indeed it is, and I really like Agda s mixfix syntax. Can t have everything.
• Has this been done before? I have not seen it in any language, but Lewis Wall has blogged this idea before.

Well, let me know what you think!

2017, Kees Cook. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 License.