Recent content by DimeCadmium

Just wanted to let everyone know, the timeline has had to be pushed back a little bit due to some issues on my end, but it still should be pretty close. @H4G, if you haven't already, put a post on the forums (or shoot a message to KuJoe) would you? Thanks all.

Honestly I'd agree with this statement :P And I'm not saying that because I'm the one coding it, I'm saying it because even if I were to die tomorrow, just about everything related to the project is open info. (The only info that hasn't been released publicly is the payment details, I believe.)...

  Getting ripped off happens whether it's open-source GPL, open-source MIT, public domain/WTFPL, closed-source, etc. The only question is how easy it is to be ripped off. However, since it's MIT, you could technically say I'm explicitly allowing it to be ripped off. :P

Now that the wall-of-text is done: If you have any comments, suggestions, requests, etc: http://vpsm.net/forum-3.html If you want to discuss something with me: Freenode #jfr Please, please, please do not comment on {the code,how I should do things,how the way I am doing things is bad,how the...

Yes, that is why I chose it. However license violations are rampant anyways, so whether it's GPL or proprietary or MIT or WTFPL it doesn't really matter... However I fail to see how a permissive license translates to a small feature set. (see also next point) MIT license requires attribution...

What does the license have to do with the "loftiness" of the goals? I'd say the license would make it more likely to meet those goals because anyone can make it meet the goals even if I were to {quit,die,disappear}. Edit: oh, and this is a serious question - I'm curious what your reasoning is...

Normally I'd agree, but the idea is that essentially anything it tries to do will require root: vzctl, "console"s, etc. On the other hand I'll get to it when I get to it! Just to let everyone know the plans I'm finalizing a timeline with KuJoe right now that's looking at a August 1 completion...

  Okay, how did I not know about this one :( Yep, that'd be good. I've also been thinking, even if the user's shell can't be setuid, I suspect the authorized_keys command="" can be. I'll have to test that all before I know though :p

That was the idea. The only issue for me is whether Linux'll allow the login shell to be setuid :P

My current idea is, as KuJoe said, just doing SSH with a custom shell (that hands over to a setuid, sudo, whatever executable - not finalized yet etc). That way I'm using a time-tested authentication/encryption system, but if something gets hold of the private keys the worst they can do is...