Le pape a parlé avec des astronautes en orbite

Le pape Benoît XVI a parlé avec des astronautes à bord de la Station spatiale internationale hier, un évènement historique puisqu'il devient le premier pape à discuter avec des astronautes en orbite.

Organisé par l'Agence spatiale européenne, l'appel a été passé depuis la bibliothèque apostolique vaticane à 14 h 11 heure locale (12 h 11 GMT). L'astronaute allemand Thomas Reiter, le président de l'Agence spatiale italienne Enrico Saggese, et le général de l’Aeronautica militare Giuseppe Bernardis étaient présents dans la salle du Vatican. À bord de la station orbitale étaient présents les membres italiens, américains et russes de la mission STS-134 d'Endeavour et de l'Expédition 27.

Le commandant d'Endeavour Mark E. Kelly a salué le pape depuis la station spatiale. Le pape a souhaité à sa femme, la parlementaire démocrate de l'Arizona Gabrielle Giffords, un bon rétablissement de la tentative d'assassinat perpétrée à son encontre en janvier dernier. Le pape a également demandé aux astronautes leurs impressions sur la planète vue depuis l'espace.

« Nous survolons la plupart du monde et nous ne voyons pas les frontières, mais en même temps, nous nous rendons compte que les gens se battent entre eux et il y a beaucoup de violence dans ce monde » a déclaré Kelly. Le pape a adressé ses condoléances à l'astronaute italien Paolo Nespoli, dont la mère est décédée plus tôt ce mois-ci alors qu'il était dans l'espace.


Possible black hole created in US

US particle physicists at Brookhaven National Laboratory in Upton, New York have created a fireball in a particle accelerator that bears a striking similarity to a black hole.  It was generated at the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider (RHIC) by smashing beams of gold nuclei together at almost the speed of light.

The collision produces a ball of plasma which is about 300 million times hotter that the surface of the Sun. The fireball can be detected because it absorbs jets of particles produced by the collision, but in this case 10 times as many jets were being absorbed as had been predicted by calculations.

Physicist Horatiu Nastase of Brown University in Providence, Rhode Island says that the calculations show that the fireball has properties similar to that of a black hole. Nastase says this could help explain why so few jets are seen coming out of the fireball. He thinks the particles are being absorbed into the core and reappearing as thermal (Hawking) radiation, just like theory predicts happens in a black hole.

Other physicists have pointed out possible holes in Nastase’s calculations. Carlos Nunez of MIT in Cambridge, Massachusetts said, “I wouldn’t say his model is wrong, but it’s clearly under construction.”

Even if Nastase turns out to be right, the black holes created pose no danger. At this scale gravity is not the dominant force in a black hole and they quickly evaporate away - this one lasted a mere 10-23 seconds, that is 10 million, billion, billionths of a second.


Provável buraco negro criado nos EUA

Físicos de partícula dos Estados Unidos da América, no Laboratório Nacional Brookhaven em Upton, Nova York criaram uma bola de fogo em um acelerador de partícula que possui alguma semelhança com  um buraco negro.  Ele foi gerado no   Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider (RHIC)  —Colidor Relativístico de Íons Pesados— pela  quebra dos núcleos de átomos de ouro que colidiram   em  velocidades próximas da luz.

As colisões  produziram uma bola de plasma que é aproximadamente 300 milhões de vezes mais quentes que a superfície do Sol. A bola de fogo pode ser descoberta porque ela absorve jatos de partículas produzidas pelas colisões.

O físico Horatiu Nastase da Universidade Brown em Providence, Rhode Island,  diz que  cálculos mostram que a bola  de fogo tem propriedades semelhantes àquelas de um buraco negro. Nastase diz que isto pode ajudar a explicar por que muito poucos jatos são vistos saindo da bola de fogo. Ele pensa que as partículas estão sendo absortas no núcleo e reaparecendo como radiações termais, da mesma forma como a teoria prevê acontecer em um buraco negro.

Outros físicos indicaram falhas  possíveis nos  cálculos de Nastase. Carlos Nunez de MIT em Cambridge,  Massachusetts disse, “eu não diria que o seu modelo está errado, mas ele é claramente um modelo ainda em construção.”

Mesmo que Nastase tenha  razão, os buracos negros  artificiais não representam  nenhum perigo.  Nesta escala a gravidade não é a força dominante como acontece em um buraco negro. Os buracos negros artificais  rapidamente evaporam-se  - o último deles durou apenas 10−23 segundos, que é 10 milhões de  bilhões  de bilionésimos  de um segundo.


Predictable random number generator discovered in the Debian version of OpenSSL

A major security hole was discovered in the pseudo-random number generator (PRNG) of the Debian version of OpenSSL. OpenSSL is one of the most used cryptographic software, that allows the creation of secure network connections with the protocols called SSL and TLS. It is included in many popular computer programs, like the Mozilla Firefox web browser and the Apache web server. Debian is one of the most used GNU/Linux distributions, on which are based other distributions, like Ubuntu and Knoppix. The problem affects all the Debian-based distributions that were used to create cryptographic keys since the September 17, 2006. The bug was discovered by Luciano Bello, an argentine Debian package maintainer, and was announced on May 13, 2008.

This vulnerability was caused by the removal of two lines of code from the original version of the OpenSSL library. These lines were used to gather some entropy data by the library, needed to seed the PRNG used to create private keys, on which the secure connections are based. Without this entropy, the only dynamic data used was the PID of the software. Under Linux the PID can be a number between 1 and 32,768, that is a too small range of values if used to seed the PRNG and will cause the generation of predictable numbers. Therefore any key generated can be predictable, with only 32,767 possible keys for a given architecture and key length, and the secrecy of the network connections created with those keys is fully compromised.

These lines were removed as "suggested" by two audit tools (Valgrind and Purify) used to find vulnerabilities in the software distributed by Debian. These tools warned the Debian maintainers that some data was used before its initialization, that normally can lead to a security bug, but this time it was not the case, as the OpenSSL developers wrote on March 13, 2003. Anyway this change was erroneously applied on September 17, 2006, when the OpenSSL Debian version 0.9.8c-1 was released to the public.

Even though the Debian maintainer responsible for this software released a patch to fix this bug on May 8, 2008, the impact may be severe. In fact OpenSSL is commonly used in software to protect the passwords, to offer privacy and security. Any private key created with this version of OpenSSL is weak and must be replaced, included the session keys that are created and used only temporary. This means that any data encrypted with these keys can be decrypted without a big deal, even if these keys are used (but not created) with a version of the library not affected, like the ones included in other operating systems.

For example any web server running under any operating system may use a weak key created on a vulnerable Debian-based system. Any encrypted connection (HTTPS) to this web server established by any browser can be decrypted. This may be a serious problem for sites that requires a secure connection, like banks or private web sites. Also, if some encrypted connection was recorded in the past, it can be decrypted in the same way.

Another serious problem is for the network security software, like OpenSSH and OpenVPN, that are used to encrypt the traffic to protect passwords and grant the access to an administrative console or a private network protected by firewalls. This may allows hackers to gain unwanted access to private computers, networks or data traveled over the network, even if a not affected version of OpenSSL was used.

The same behavior can be applied to any software or protocol that use SSL, like POP3S, SSMTP, FTPS, if used with a weak key. This is the case of Tor, software used to offer strong anonymity on the TCP/IP, where about 300 of 1,500-2,000 nodes used a weak key. With 15-20% of weak Tor nodes, there is a probability of 0.34-0.8% circa to build a circuit that has all tree nodes weak, resulting in a full loss of anonymity. Also the case of only one weak node begin used may facilitate some types of attack to the anonymity. The Tor hidden services, a sort of anonymous public servers, are affected too. However the issue was speedily addressed on May 14, 2008.

The same problem also interested anonymous remailers like Mixmaster and Mixminion, that use OpenSSL to create the remailer keys for the servers and the nym keys for the clients. Although currently there is no official announcement, at least two remailer changed their keys because were weak.


Fehler in Debian Linux verursacht unsichere Kryptographieschlüssel

19.05.2008 – Die Linux-Distribution „Debian/GNU Linux“ hat am Dienstagnachmittag einen schwerwiegenden Fehler in der zu Kryptographiezwecken verwendeten Softwarebibliothek „OpenSSL“ bekanntgegeben. Auf Grund einer irrtümlichen Änderung des Debian-Projekts am Zufallszahlengenerator erzeugte die Bibliothek vorhersagbare Kryptographieschlüssel. Der Fehler wurde im September 2006 in die Entwicklerversion von Debian eingebracht und ist auch in die im April 2007 herausgegebene „stabile“ Version 4.0 („etch“) übernommen worden. Ebenfalls betroffen sind Linux-Distributionen, die die OpenSSL-Quelltexte von Debian übernehmen, so beispielsweise das Ubuntu-Projekt. Gefährdet können auch andere Linux-Distributionen und andere Betriebssysteme sein, sofern dort ein mit der fehlerhaften Version erzeugter Kryptographieschlüssel verwendet wird.

Im Rahmen einer teilautomatisierten Überprüfung des OpenSSL-Quelltextes hatten Entwickler des Debian-Projektes vermeintlich fehlerhaften Programmcode entfernt. Diese Änderung führte zu einer drastischen Reduktion der Zahl der von der OpenSSL-Bibliothek erzeugbaren unterschiedlichen Kryptographieschlüssel. Unter normalen Umständen ist die Zahl der potentiellen Schlüssel unvorstellbar hoch. Bei einer üblichen Schlüssellänge von beispielsweise 1024 Bit ergeben sich 2 hoch 1024 – eine Zahl mit 309 Ziffern – unterschiedliche Kryptographieschlüssel. Durch den Fehler im Debian-Projekt wurde die Zahl der möglichen Schlüssel unabhängig von der gewählten Schlüssellänge auf nur noch 65.536 reduziert. Dadurch können alle durch den betroffenen Programmcode erzeugbaren Schlüssel in wenigen Stunden durch eine Brute-Force-Attacke berechnet werden.

Entsprechend unsichere Kryptographieschlüssel werden von verschiedenen Softwareprodukten verwendet. Zu nennen sind beispielsweise das zum entfernten Anmelden auf Computern verwendete OpenSSH oder die Anwendung OpenVPN, die sichere private Netzwerkverbindungen herstellt. Unsicher sind auch mit der fehlerhaften Komponente erzeugte Schlüssel für die verschlüsselte Übertragung von Webseiten (SSL) oder für die Verschlüsselung von E-Mail auf Basis des S/MIME-Standards. Das Debian-Projekt hat eine Liste von betroffenen Anwendungen veröffentlicht. Entwarnung konnte unter anderem für die ebenfalls zur E-Mail-Verschlüsselung verwendeten Produkte GnuPG und PGP gegeben werden, da diese Anwendungen nicht auf die OpenSSL-Bibliothek aufbauen. Festplattenverschlüsselung auf Basis von dm-crypt ist nur dann betroffen, wenn hier OpenSSL-Schlüssel anstelle von Passwörtern zum Einsatz kamen.

Das Debian-Projekt hat Programme zur Prüfung potentiell fehlerhafter Schlüssel bereitgestellt, die laut Branchendienst „Heise Online“ aber nicht in allen Fällen zuverlässig funktionieren sollen. Es wird daher empfohlen, potentiell unsichere Schlüssel neu zu erzeugen. Korrigierte Pakete der OpenSSL-Bibliothek wurden zwischenzeitlich von Debian sowohl für die Entwicklerversionen wie die aktuelle Veröffentlichung „etch“ bereitgestellt. Auch andere betroffene Distributionen bieten entsprechende Updates an. Die Installation dieser Versionen genügt allerdings nicht zur Beseitigung unsicherer Schlüssel, diese müssen in jedem Fall explizit neu erzeugt werden. Entsprechende Anleitungen wurden ebenfalls vom Debian-Projekt bereitgestellt.


Scoperta prevedibilità nel generatore di numeri casuali della versione Debian di OpenSSL

Una importante falla di sicurezza è stata scoperta nel generatore di numeri pseudo-casuali (PRNG) della versione Debian di OpenSSL. OpenSSL è uno dei più usati software di crittografia, che permette la creazione di connessioni di rete sicure attraverso i protocolli chiamati SSL e TLS ed è incluso in molti programmi per computer famosi, come il browser web Mozilla Firefox e il server web Apache. Debian è una delle più usate distribuzioni GNU/Linux, sulla quale sono basate altre distribuzioni, come Ubuntu e Knoppix. Il problema interessa tutte le distribuzioni basate su Debian che sono state utilizzate per creare delle chiavi crittografiche dal 17 settembre 2006. Il bug è stato scoperto da Luciano Bello, un gestore di pacchetti Debian argentino, e annunciato il 13 maggio 2008.

Questa vulnerabilità fu causata dalla rimozione di due linee di codice dalla versione originale della libreria di OpenSSL. Queste linee servivano alla libreria per raccogliere alcuni dati di entropia, necessari al fine di inizializzare il PRNG utilizzato per creare le chiavi private, sulle quali sono basate le connessioni sicure. Senza questa entropia, l'unico dato dinamico utilizzato era PID del software. In Linux il PID può esser un numero tra 1 e 32'768, che è una gamma di valori troppo limitata se utilizzata per inizializzare il PRNG e causa la generazione di numeri prevedibili. Quindi ogni chiave generata può esser prevedibile, con solamente 32'767 possibili chiavi per una data architettura e lunghezza della chiave, e la segretezza delle connessioni di rete create con queste chiavi è completamente compromessa.

Queste linee vennero rimosse come "suggerito" da due strumenti di audit (Valgrind e Purify) utilizzati per trovare vulnerabilità all'interno del software distribuito da Debian. Questi strumenti avvertirono i gestori Debian che qualche dato veniva utilizzato prima della sua inizializzazione, cosa che normalmente può portare a un bug di sicurezza, ma non era questo il caso, come scrissero gli sviluppatori di OpenSSL il 13 marzo 2003. Ad ogni modo questo cambiamento fu erroneamente applicato il 17 settembre 2006, quando venne rilasciata al pubblico la versione 0.9.8c-1 di OpenSSL di Debian.

Nonostante il gestore Debian responsabile per questo software abbia rilasciato una patch per correggere questo bug l'8 maggio 2008, l'impatto può essere molto grave. Infatti OpenSSL è comunemente utilizzato nel software per proteggere le password, per offrire privacy e sicurezza. Ogni chiave privata creata con questa versione di OpenSSL è debole e deve esser rimpiazzata, incluse le chiavi di sessione che vengono create e utilizzate solo temporaneamente. Questo vuol dire che ogni dato cifrato con queste chiavi può esser decifrato senza un grande sforzo, nonostante le chiavi vengano utilizzate (ma non create) con una versione della libreria non difettosa, come quelle incluse in altri sistemi operativi.

Per esempio un qualsiasi server web funzionante su un qualsiasi sistema operativo potrebbe utilizzare una chiave debole creata su un sistema vulnerabile basato su Debian. Qualsiasi connessione cifrata (HTTPS) a questo server web effettuata da un qualsiasi browser può esser decifrata. Questo può esser un serio problema per quei siti che richiedono una connessione sicura, come le banche o i siti web privati. Inoltre, se qualche connessione cifrata è stata registrata in passato, questa può essere decifrata alla stessa maniera.

Un altro problema serio è per i software di sicurezza di rete, come OpenSSH e OpenVPN, che vengono utilizzati per cifrare il traffico al fine di proteggere le password e fornire l'accesso a una console amministrativa o a una rete privata protetta da firewall. Questo può permettere agli hacker di ottenere l'accesso indesiderato a computer, reti o dati privati che abbiano attraversato la rete, anche se non è stata utilizzata una delle versioni di OpenSSL affette.

Lo stesso discorso può essere applicato ad ogni software o protocollo di rete che utilizzi SSL, come POP3S, SSMTP, FTPS, se usati con una chiave debole. È il caso di Tor, software utilizzato per offrire anonimato forte sul TCP/IP, dove approssimativamente 300 di 1'500-2'000 nodi hanno utilizzato una chiave debole. Con il 15-20% di nodi Tor deboli, c'è una probabilità dello 0,34-0,8% circa di costruire un circuito che abbia tutti e tre i nodi deboli, col risultato di una perdita completa dell'anonimato. Inoltre il caso in cui solo un nodo debole venga impiegato può facilitare alcuni tipi di attacco all'anonimato. Anche i servizi nascosti, una sorta di server pubblici anonimi, sono affetti. Ad ogni modo questo problema è stato prontamente corretto il 14 maggio 2008.

Lo stesso problema ha colpito anche i remailer anonimi come Mixmaster e Mixminion che utilizzano OpenSSL per creare le chiavi del remailer per i server e le chiavi del nym per i client. Anche se attualmente non è stato diramato alcun annuncio ufficiale, almeno due remailer hanno cambiato le loro chiavi perché erano deboli.


DebianやUbuntuのOpenSSLに予測可能な乱数を生成してしまう脆弱性

US-CERTや、Secunia、Debian Project、ITmediaによると、DebianやUbuntuのOpenSSLパッケージなどの脆弱性を解消したパッケージが公開された。この脆弱性は、生成する乱数が予測可能になることにより、その乱数を使って生成する鍵の材料が予測可能となる。[1][2][3][4][5]

Secuniaは、この問題の危険度を5段階で2番目に高い危険度 (Highly Critical) だと評価している。[2]

Debian Projectによると、この脆弱性は、OpenSSL自身の問題ではなく、CVE-2008-0166の修正をDebian Projectが行った修正が原因で、Debianから派生したUbuntuなどのディストリビューションにも影響がある。また、この脆弱性をもつシステムで生成した鍵を他のOSにインポートした場合にも問題がある。[3]

影響を受ける鍵は次のとおり。[3]

これらに関して、脆弱性を修正したパッケージをインストールした後で、鍵を作り直す必要がある。[3]

ITmediaが報じたところによると、SANS Internet Storm Centerによれば、この脆弱性を使ってブルートフォース攻撃を行うスクリプトが公開されているという。[6]


Primary camera on Hubble Space Telescope shut down

The primary camera on the Hubble Space Telescope has shut down and is likely to only be restored to partial functionality, according to reports from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA).

The camera on the telescope, known as the "Advanced Camera for Surveys" or ACS, can be reactivated but will be restored to only one-third of its operating capacity. The restoration will probably take place in mid-February. The camera shut down over the weekend, probably due to a failure of its backup power supply. It was the third such shutdown of the camera in the past calendar year. The camera had been operating on its backup power since June 30, 2006, when engineers switched from the primary power supply ("Side A") to the backup ("Side B") due to a malfunction. A review board was convened on January 29 to assess all options and to decide on a course of action. Their findings will be reported to NASA on March 2, 2007.

The ACS, developed jointly by four American agencies, was installed in March of 2002. It is a system of three cameras, filters, and dispersers which act to detect wavelengths of light ranging from near-infrared to ultraviolet. It is a system that was designed to last five years, according to Preston Burch, associate director and program manager for the Hubble Space Telescope. NASA also indicated that the other four main systems on the telescope remain unaffected and functioning normally. Research work will resume this week using those systems.

A scheduled mission to the space telescope in 2008 is expected to deliver instruments to further upgrade the capabilities of the telescope. It is not known what the effect of the ACS failure will have on the scheduled mission. Burch said in a press release posted on the NASA main website, "It is important that the review board conduct a thorough investigation that will allow us to determine if there are any changes needed in the new instruments that will be installed on the upcoming servicing mission so that we can be sure of maximizing the telescope's scientific output. We are continuing to make excellent progress in our preparations for the servicing mission, which is presently targeted to fly in September 2008."


Hauptkamera des Weltraumteleskops „Hubble“ fällt erneut aus

Greenbelt (Vereinigte Staaten), 31.01.2007 – Wie vom Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) mitgeteilt wurde, sind beim Weltraumteleskop „Hubble“ zum dritten Mal innerhalb weniger Monate technische Probleme aufgetreten. Die Stromversorgung von zwei Hauptkanälen der wichtigsten Kamera ist nach einem Kurzschluss unterbrochen. Der zuständige Manager bei der NASA, Preston Burch, sprach davon, dass dieser Zwischenfall angesichts der Beliebtheit „Hubbles“ bei den Astronomen natürlich eine Enttäuschung sei, „Hubble“ aber noch zahlreiche weitere wissenschaftliche Fähigkeiten zu bieten habe.

Das Weltraumteleskop, benannt nach dem US-Astronomen Edwin Hubble, wurde gemeinsam von der US-Raumfahrtbehörde NASA und der europäischen ESA entwickelt. Hubble ist 13 Meter lang und mehr als elf Tonnen schwer. Der Hauptspiegel hat einen Durchmesser von 2,4 Metern. Solarzellen versorgen das Teleskop mit der für den Betrieb erforderlichen Energie. „Hubble“ wurde am 24. April 1990 von der Raumfähre Discovery ins All transportiert. Auf seiner Umlaufbahn in 600 Kilometern Höhe benötigt es 96 Minuten für eine Erdumkreisung. Zunächst lieferte es nur unscharfe Bilder und musste repariert werden. Die jetzt ausgefallene „Advanced Camera for Surveys“ (ACS) wurde 2002 von der Besatzung einer US-Raumfähre eingebaut. „Hubble“ lieferte bisher mehr als 750.000 Bilder. Spektakuläre Aufnahmen von fernen Galaxien, sterbenden Sonnen und schwarzen Löchern verhalfen den Astronomen neue Erkenntnisse über die Entstehung und den Aufbau des Universums.

Schon seit längerer Zeit gibt es Pläne für einen „Reparaturflug“ zu dem beliebtesten Weltraumobservatorium für Frühjahr oder Herbst 2008. Inwieweit sich der erneute Störfall auf diese Mission auswirken wird, soll bis Anfang März geklärt werden.


La caméra principale du télescope spatial Hubble est tombée en panne et n'est susceptible de pouvoir être réparée que partiellement, selon des rapports provenant de la NASA.

La caméra sur le télescope, appelée Advanced Camera for Surveys [1] ou ACS, peut être réactivée mais ne sera restaurée qu'à un tiers de sa capacité opératoire. Cette réparation sera probablement effectuée mi-février. La caméra est tombée en panne ce week-end, probablement en raison d'une défaillance de son alimentation en énergie de secours. C'est la troisième fois en un an qu'une telle panne de caméra se produit. La caméra fonctionnait sur son alimentation de secours depuis le 30 juin 2006 lorsque les ingénieurs ont permuté l'alimentation de la source principale (côté A) à la source secondaire (côté B) en raison d'un dysfonctionnement. Une réunion de revue a été décidée le 29 janvier pour considérer les options possibles et décider de la marche à suivre en conséquence. Leurs attendus seront publiés par la NASA le 2 mars 2007.

L'ACS, développée conjointement par quatre agences américaines, fut installée en mars 2002. C'est un système de trois caméras, filtres et disperseurs qui détectent des longueurs d'ondes allant du proche infrarouge à l'ultraviolet. Ce système fut conçu pour durer cinq ans, selon Preston Burch, directeur adjoint et directeur du programme pour le télescope spatial Hubble. La NASA a aussi spécifié que les quatre autres principaux systèmes du télescope ne sont pas affectés et fonctionnent normalement. Le travail de recherche reprendra cette semaine grâce à leur utilisation.

Une mission sur le télescope spatial prévue en 2008 devrait améliorer les capacités du télescope par l'adjonction de nouveaux appareils. L'impact qu'aura la défaillance de l'ACS sur cette mission n'est pas connu. Burch a indiqué dans un communiqué de presse sur le site internet principal de la NASA : « Il est important pour le comité d'évaluation de conduire une évaluation complète qui permettra de déterminer si des modifications des nouveaux instruments qui seront installés lors de la mission de service à venir sont nécessaires, ce qui nous permettra de maximiser le rendement scientifique du télescope. Nous continuons une excellente progression dans nos préparatifs pour la mission de service, qui est à présent programmée pour septembre 2008. »


Proton rocket launches Ekspress AM-33 comsat

A Russian Proton-M/Briz-M carrier rocket launched this morning at 00:18 UTC, carrying the Ekspress AM-33 (also known as Express AM-33) communication satellite.

Launch, from area 200/39 at the Baikonur Cosmodrome in Kazakhstan took place on schedule, and the satellite was successfully placed into an intermediate transfer orbit. Operations to place the satellite into its final Geosynchronous orbit, through further burns of the Briz-M upper stage, should have been completed, however no official announcement has yet been made.

This is the third orbital launch of 2008, and the first to be conducted by Russia.

The satellite will provide C, L and Ku-band communication services. It has a mass of 2600kg, and an expected orbital lifetime of 12 years. It was constructed by NPO PM and Thales Alenia Space, and will be operated by the Russian Space Communication Company, and RKA. It will be placed in a geosynchronous orbit, about 36,000 kilometres above the Earth, at a longitude of 95.5°E. It will replace the AM-11 satellite, which malfunctioned in 2006.


Ракета Протон изстрелва спътник Експрес АМ-33

Руската ракета-носител Протон беше изстреляна тази сутрин в 00:18 UTC, като на борда носеше изкуствен спътник Експрес АМ-33.

Изтрелването се състоя от ракетна площадка 200/39 в космодрума Байконур, Казахстан и спътникът беше успешно вкаран в средна трансферна орбита. Трябва да бъдат извършени маневри за да се издигне в геосинхронна орбита след изгарянето на последната степен на ракетата, но все още няма никакви изявления до какъв етап е стигнала мисията.

Това е третото орбитално изстрелване за 2008 и първото ръководено от Русия.

Изкуственият спътник има тегло 2600 kg и се очаква да функционира в следващите 12 години, т.е. до около 2020 г.


Foguete Proton lança o Ekspress AM-33 comsat

Um Proton-M/Briz-M Foguete tramsportador Russo foi lançado esta manhã, às 00: 18 GMT, transportando o Express AM-33, um satélite de comunicação.

O Lançamento ocorreu na área no 200/39 Baikonur Cosmodrome do Cazaquistão, onde teve lugar na data prevista, bem como o satélite foi colocado em uma órbita de transferência intermédia. As Operações de colocar o satélite em sua órbita final, através de mais queimaduras da fase superior do Briz-M, estão em curso.

*The satellite “Express-AM33” is successfully launched — NPO PM, 28 de janeiro de 2008

*Ракета "Протон-М" стартовала с Байконура [inativa] — RIA Novosti, 28 de janeiro de 2008. Página visitada em 28 de janeiro de 2008. Arquivada em 30 de janeiro de 2008

*Успешный пуск РН «Протон-М» - «Бриз-М» - «Экспресс-АМ33» [inativa] — TSENKI, 28 de janeiro de 2008. Página visitada em 28 de janeiro de 2008. Arquivada em 31 de janeiro de 2008


Quality, innovation and competitiveness centre-stage at Taipei Int'l Hardware & DIY Show

The 7th Taipei International Hardware & DIY Show, organized by Kaigo Taiwan (The representative of Koelnmesse in Taiwan) and Koelnmesse GmbH, started on October 18-20 at Taipei World Trade Center Exhibition Hall 3. This show has 183 participants using 300 booths to exhibit accessories and tools on esoteric fabricating, home-living applications, and security.

With people in Taiwan valuing on the quality of home-living, the organizer set a pre-show pavilion of "2008 Taipei Home & Lifestyle Fair" and invited B&Q & HomeBox holding DIY workshops for visitors.

This exhibition is conjuncted with industry and applications, and pursuing with three main topics of “Quality, Innovation and Competitiveness”. International factories such as Hitachi, Rexon, Ryobi participated this show for the export opportunity in the hardware industry.

After the "Product Certificates and Testing" pavilion in TAITRONICS Autumn, Bureau of Standards, Metrology & Inspection, M.O.E.A., R.O.C. (Taiwan) and DIY in Europe magazine were invited for speeches focused on certifications on hardware & DIY products and environment issues in EU.


台北國際五金暨DIY展 產業與應用結合 展現台灣競爭力

由開國有限公司主辦的台北國際五金暨DIY展，今年進入第七年，共吸引183家廠商，使用300個攤位，在台北世貿中心展三館進行展出，這項展覽除了展示組裝時使用的零配件，另外也有部分廠商，將相關的精密組裝產業，與現代生活進行結合，當中包含汽機車零配件、工具組整理應用、以及安全相關應用等，都可在本展覽中一覽無遺。

在台灣民眾重視居家生活品味的同時，主辦單位在今年，為了幫明年與本展覽一同在台北世貿中心展一館舉辦的「台北國際居家暨生活時尚展」暖身，特別設立了預展專區，並邀請HomeBox與B&Q特力屋兩家知名廠商，舉辦DIT研習活動，讓參觀者體驗居家DIY的樂趣。

這項展覽是一個結合應用與精密產業的專業展覽，主要以「優質、創新、競爭力」為訴求，吸引台灣的外銷廠商與經貿媒體機構進行參展，並且，國外如日立、RYOBI、力山工業等國際廠商，也希望藉由本次的參展，來拓展台灣的組裝市場。

繼上週貿協的台北國際電子展推出「產品驗證主題館」後，為了符合環保等時事議題，主辦單位也邀請經濟部標準檢驗局，針對參展廠商進行「手工具產品檢測及認證說明」的演講，另外如「DIY in Europe」雜誌的總經理，今天也會針對歐盟的環保驗證，進行主題演講。

這項展覽是從今日開始一連展出三天，每日開放時間為10：00─17：00（20日提前半小時結束），基於安全考量與展覽品質，僅提供同業相關人士進行登記換證。


Ransomware attack hits over 200 US companies, forces Swedish grocery chain to close

On Friday, a ransomware attack which initially targeted software company Kaseya spread to over 200 companies in the US through Kaseya's network management software.  Huntress Labs, a cybersecurity company, alleged the attack was carried out by REvil, a Russia-based ransomware group.  Kaseya told its customers to stop using its services when it learned of the attack.

According to NBC News, the ransomware first spread to about 40 of Kaseya's customers, which are mainly companies that manage Internet services for their customers, some of which manage them for thousands of companies.  John Hammond, a security researcher at Huntress Labs, said that "It's reasonable to think this could potentially be impacting thousands of small businesses".  Kaseya notified its customers of the attack on Friday afternoon and warned them to stop using its services immediately.

Business Insider reported REvil is a Russian-based organization which provides ransomware-as-a-service.  BleepingComputer reported receiving a sample of the ransomware used in REvil's attacks and says that they demand USD five million for the ransomed files to be decrypted, though it is unknown if every victim received a demand for that same amount.  Fabian Wosar, Chief Technical Offier (CTO) at the Emsisoft security firm, said affected customers had received demands for USD 44,999.

Swedish grocery chain Coop was also affected by the attack, and had to close all 800 of its stores because its checkout tills could not process payments due to the ransomware.  Speaking to Swedish Television, Therese Knapp, a Coop spokesperson, said "We have been troubleshooting and restoring all night, but have communicated that we will need to keep the stores closed today".  Swedish company Visma Esscom, which manages servers for businesses, was using Kaseya software, according to Reuters.  Railway services in Sweden were also disrupted.

On Saturday, US President Joe Biden directed intelligence agencies to investigate who was behind the attack.  He said that "we're not certain" who is behind the attack, adding "[t]he initial thinking was it was not the Russian government but we're not sure yet".  The US Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency stated that it is "taking action to understand and address the recent supply-chain ransomware attack".


Hackersgroep REvil pleegt wereldwijde ransomware-aanval

Afgelopen weekend heeft REvil (en), een hackersorganisatie die naar verluidt banden zou hebben met Rusland, een wereldwijde cyberaanval uitgevoerd. Naar schatting zijn  in totaal ongeveer 1500 bedrijven in zeker 17 landen hierdoor getroffen. Daarmee is het naar alle waarschijnlijkheid een van de grootste ransomware-aanvallen uit de geschiedenis. Afgelopen maandag werd bekend dat REvil 70 miljoen dollar aan cryptmunten eist als losgeld.

De aanval begon op donderdag 2 juli en nam in de daaropvolgende dagen steeds grotere vormen aan. In eerste instantie werd het Amerikaanse softwarebedrijf Kaseya getroffen, waarna de aanval zich uitbreidde naar ca. 40 klanten van Kaseya. Dit maakte Kaseya tegen het eind van vrijdag bekend. De aanval trof hierna steeds meer Amerikaanse bedrijven trof en breidde zich ook uit naar andere landen. De Zweedse supermarktketen Coop, die afhankelijk is van de Noorse IT-groep Visma (en), moest als gevolg van de aanval bijna al zijn 800 winkels in Zweden sluiten.

Een onderzoeksteam bij Palo Alto Networks heeft inmiddels een nieuw onderzoek naar de hackergroep gepubliceerd. Vorige maand pleegde REvil ook al een hack op het vleesverwerkingsbedrijf JBS.


Recently discovered planet may contain 'hot ice'

A team of European and American astronomers say that a recently discovered extrasolar planet, located not far from Earth, contains oceans and rivers of hot solid water.

The team discovered the planet, Gliese 436 b, which is roughly the size of Neptune, using the Geneva Observatory and it is roughly 33 light-years away from Earth.

"The water is frozen by the pressure but it's hot. It's a bit strange -- we are used to water changing conditions because of temperature, but in fact water can also be solidified by pressure. It's not a very welcoming planet," said one of the astronomers who discovered the planet, Frederic Pont.

Scientists say that there is not likely to be any life on the planet, but that if there is such a large amount of water on it, then it is likely that other planets will also have water. It orbits closely around the Red M-dwarf star Gliese 436 which is significantly smaller and cooler than the Sun. The planet's surface temperature is believed to be near 540 degrees Fahrenheit (250 degrees Celsius). It circles Gliese 436 every 2.6 days at a small fraction of the distance between the Sun and Earth, or 4.1 million kilometers (2.6 million miles).

"It shows there are many ocean planets. From the size and the mass we get the density," added Pont who wrote in a report about the planet saying "the mass and radius that we measure for GJ 436b indicate that it is mainly composed of water ice. It is an 'ice giant' planet like Uranus and Neptune rather than a small-mass gas giant or a very heavy 'super-Earth."

American astronomers first discovered GJ 436b back in 2004, but no clear indication was found on what it might contain on its surface.

The same team of astronomers were made famous when they discovered the first "earth-like planet" Gliese 581 c in April.


Une équipe d'astronomes européens et américains découve une planète de « glace chaude »


Record size 17.4 million-digit prime found

Curtis Cooper, a mathematician and computer science professor at the University of Central Missouri, has discovered the largest known prime number to date on January 25. Several people verified the discovery using different hardware and software by the beginning of February and it was announced on Tuesday. Cooper found the prime as a participant in the distributed computing project known as the Great Internet Mersenne Prime Search, or GIMPS. Cooper runs the GIMPS client, called Prime95, on an estimated 1,000 computers at the university.

The number was first reported to the GIMPS server on January 25 from a university computer which had been running 39 days non-stop. However as for any Mersenne prime candidates, the discovery was announced after several people have verified the number using different hardware and software. The three independent verifications took from three to seven days of computation on powerful hardware.

A prime number is a positive integer greater than 1 that can only be evenly divided by 1 and itself. The first few prime numbers are 2, 3, 5, 7, 11, 13, 17 and 19. 77 (for example) is not prime because it is a product of 7 and 11. The newly discovered prime is expressed as 257,885,161 − 1 and has 17,425,170 digits. It is a specific type of prime number called a Mersenne prime, which are of the form 2p − 1. The exponent p must be prime for the number to be prime. As of February 2013, there are only 48 known Mersenne primes.

George Woltman developed and founded GIMPS, the longest known continuously running computer project, in 1996. Cooper as a participant had previously discovered two other Mersenne primes, 230,402,457 − 1 in December 2005 and 232,582,657 − 1 in September 2006, with fellow professor Steven Boone. This latest discovery ends an intermission of almost four years; the previous Mersenne prime was found in April 2009.


Největší známé prvočíslo je 2⁵⁷⁸⁸⁵¹⁶¹-1

Bylo oznámeno nalezení doposud největšího známého prvočísla – 257885161−1. Profesor matematiky a informatiky Curtis Cooper z americké univerzity University of Central Missouri jej přitom našel již 25. ledna, ale s oficiálním oznámením se počkalo na potvrzení nezávislými výpočty. Ty provedli dobrovolníci, kteří jsou stejně jako Curtis Cooper zapojeni do projektu GIMPS zaměřeného na hledání prvočísel mezi Mersennovými čísly. Sám Cooper nechal běžet program Prime95, kterým jsou čísla zkoumána, na zhruba 1000 počítačích na své univerzitě.

Nové největší známé prvočíslo má 17 425 170 desítkových číslic, zhruba o polovinu víc než 243112609−1, které bylo největším známým prvočíslem od 23. srpna 2008. To je také Mersennovým číslem – Mersennova čísla lze totiž na prvočíselnost testovat výrazně rychleji než náhodná čísla za pomoci Lucasova-Lehmerova testu. Všech deset v současnosti největších známých prvočísel jsou Mersennova čísla, i s nejnovějším přírůstkem je dohromady známo 48 Mersennových prvočísel. Cooper se v rámci projektu GIMPS podílel již na nalezení třetího.


17.4 மில்லியன் இலக்கங்கள் கொண்ட முதன்மை எண் கண்டுபிடிக்கப்பட்டது

கணிதவியலாளரும் மத்திய மிசூரிப் பல்கலைக்கழகப் பேராசிரியருமான கேர்ட்டிஸ் கூப்பர், இதுவரை அறியப்பட்டவற்றில் மிகப்பெரிய முதன்மை எண்ணைக் கண்டுபிடித்துள்ளார். சனவரி 25ம் திகதி கண்டுபிடிக்கப்பட்ட இது பெப்ரவரி ஆரம்பத்திலிருந்து பல்வேறு நபர்களாலும், பல்வேறு மென்பொருட்கள் மற்றும் வன்பொருட்களைப் பயன்படுத்தி சரிபார்க்கப்பட்டு உறுதிசெய்யப்பட்டுள்ளது. பின்னர் இது பற்றிய செய்தி கடந்த செவ்வாய்க்கிழமை அறிவிக்கப்பட்டது.

GIMPS என்று அறியப்படும் கணினி வேலைத்திட்டத்தின் கீழ் இம் முதன்மை எண் கண்டுபிடிக்கப்பட்டுள்ளது. இவ்வேலைத்திட்டத்துக்கான கணனி செய்நிரலான பிரைம்95 ஆனது பல்கலைக்கழகத்திலுள்ள ஆயிரத்துக்கும் மேற்பட்ட கணினிகளில் செயற்படுத்தப்பட்டது.

சனவரி 25 அன்று இந்த முதன்மை எண், பல்கலைக்கழகக் கணினி ஒன்றிலிருந்து GIMPS சேவையகக் கணனிக்கு அறிவிக்கப்பட்டது. இதனைக் கண்டுபிடிப்பதற்காக இக் கணினி 39 நாட்கள் தொடர்ந்து ஓய்வின்றி செயற்பட்டிருந்தது. எவ்வாறாயினும் ஏனைய பெறுபேறுகளைப் போலவே இக் கண்டுபிடிப்பும் பல்வேறு தரப்பினராலும் சரிபார்க்கப்பட்ட பின்னரே அறிவிக்கப்பட்டது. இதற்காக மூன்று தனித்தனி சரிபார்ப்புக்கள் நடத்தப்பட்டன. இதற்காக சக்திவாய்ந்த கணனி வன்பொருட்கள் பயன்படுத்தப்பட்டதுடன் மூன்றிலிருந்து ஏழு நாட்கள் வரை தேவைப்பட்டன.

முதன்மை எண் அல்லது பகா எண் என்பது 1ஆலும் தன்னாலும் மீதியின்றி வகுபடக்கூடிய 1 இலும் கூடிய நேர் முழுவெண் ஆகும். சில முதன்மை எண்களாக 2, 3, 5, 7, 11, 13, 17 மற்றும் 19 ஆகியவற்றைக் குறிப்பிடலாம். எனினும் 77 (உதாரணமாக) ஒரு முதன்மை எண் அல்ல. ஏனெனில் இது 7 மற்றும் 11 ஆகியவற்றின் பெருக்கமாகும். புதிதாகக் கண்டுபிடிக்கப்பட்ட முதன்மை எண் 257,885,161 − 1 எனும் தொடர்பால் தரப்படும். மேலும் இதில் 17,425,170 இலக்கங்கள் உள்ளன. இது ஒரு சிறப்பு வகை முதன்மை எண்ணாகும். இது மேர்சேன் முதன்மை எண் என அழைக்கப்படுகிறது. இதன் வடிவம் 2p − 1 என்றவாறு இருக்கும். இங்கு அவ்வெண் முதன்மை எண்ணாக இருக்க pயும் முதன்மை எண்ணாக இருப்பது அவசியமாகும். பெப்ரவரி 2013ன் படி, 48 மேர்சேன் முதன்மை எண்கள் மாத்திரமே கண்டுபிடிக்கப்பட்டுள்ளன.

1996ல், ஜோர்ஜ் வோல்ட்மன் என்பவரே GIMPS செயற்திட்டத்தை உருவாக்கி வழிநடத்தியவர். இச் செயற்திட்டமே தொடர்ச்சியாக செயற்படும் கணினிச் செயற்திட்டம் ஆகும். கூப்பர் இதற்கு முன் வேறு இரண்டு மேர்சேன் முதன்மை எண்களைக் கண்டுபிடித்துள்ளார். இவற்றுள் 230,402,457 − 1 என்பது டிசம்பர் 2005இலும், 232,582,657 − 1 என்பது செப்டம்பர் 2006இலும் கண்டுபிடிக்கப்பட்டன. இதன்போது ஸ்டீவன் போன் எனும் பேராசிரியரும் பங்குபற்றியிருந்தார். இக்கண்டுபிடிப்பு மூலம் நான்கு வருடங்களின் பின் மற்றொரு எண் கண்டுபிடிக்கப்பட்டுள்ளது. இதற்கு முன்னைய மேர்சேன் முதன்மை எண் ஏப்பிரல் 2009 இல் கண்டுபிடிக்கப்பட்டிருந்தது.

வெள்ளி, பெப்ரவரி 8, 2013


Red Hat to move focus away from CentOS in favour of Stream; CentOS team discuss implications with Wikinews

On Tuesday, US-based software company Red Hat announced their plans to shift their focus away from CentOS in favour of CentOS Stream.

In the blog post Chris Wright, the Chief Technological Officer of Red Hat said Red Hat had informed the CentOS governing board that Red Hat was "shifting our investment fully from CentOS Linux to CentOS Stream".  At least five of the nine CentOS Governing Board listed on the project are Red Hat employees.

Started in 2004, CentOS has been a free-of-cost free/libre open source software which provided binary-code compatibility with Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) — Red Hat's GNU General Public Licensed paid operating system.  CentOS was absorbed into Red Hat in 2014, with Red Hat gaining the trademark rights of "CentOS".

Red Hat also sponsors the Fedora operating system.  Red Hat even gives the software engineering interns laptops with Fedora on it.  Till now, software development took place on Fedora, which was later adopted in RHEL, which the Red Hat maintained and provided support for, for those customers who had RHEL subscription.  CentOS would then follow RHEL to provide the same features free of cost, but without the support.

Stream was announced in September 2019, just two months after Red Hat was acquired by IBM.  CentOS Stream's development cycle had new features added to it before the features became a part of RHEL.  Stream receives more frequent updates, however, it does not follow RHEL's release cycle.

With CentOS Stream, developments from the community and the Red Hat emplyees would take place beforehand on both Fedora, and Stream as a rolling release, before those features are absorbed into RHEL.  CentOS followed the release cycle of RHEL and therefore it was a stable distribution.  Features available in CentOS were tried and tested by Fedora, and then RHEL maintainers.  Stream, on the other hand, has features added to it before those features become a part of RHEL.  That implies Stream would be ahead of RHEL's development, containing new features which are not yet tried and tested by RHEL developers, and not be binary code-compatible with RHEL.

Writing "The future of CentOS Linux is CentOS Stream", Wright further wrote in the announcement, CentOS Stream "provides a platform for rapid innovation at the community level but with a stable enough base to understand production dynamics."  Wright also said, "CentOS Stream isn't a replacement for CentOS Linux; rather, it's a natural, inevitable next step intended to fulfill the project's goal of furthering enterprise Linux innovation."

Since the announcement was made, many people expressed their anger on Internet Relay Chat (IRC), Reddit and CentOS project's mailing list.  CentOS 8's End of Life (EOL) has been moved up from May 2029 to December 31, 2021, while CentOS 7 is expected to receive maintenance updates through June 2024, outliving CentOS 8.

Gregory Kurtzer, who had started the CentOS project, announced a new operating system, Rocky Linux.  Rocky Linux describes itself as "a community enterprise Operating System designed to be 100% bug-for-bug compatible with Enterprise Linux".  The project said "Rocky Linux aims to function as a downstream build as CentOS had done previously, building releases after they have been added to the upstream vendor, not before."  The project maintainers have not decided a date for when the operating system will be released.

Kurtzer explained the reason to call the OS as Rocky Linux: "Thinking back to early CentOS days... My cofounder was Rocky McGaugh.  He is no longer with us, so as a H/T [hat tip] to him, who never got to see the success that CentOS came to be, I introduce to you...Rocky Linux".

Wikinews reached out to the members of the CentOS project, Pablo Greco and Rich Bowen, to discuss this move, its implications as well as the future of CentOS.  Greco is a maintainer of armhfp (32-bit processors) and is a part of the CentOS' quality assurance team.  Bowen — who unlike Greco, works for Red Hat — is the community manager of the CentOS project.

Can you tell me about your current role in the CentOS development, and how did you get involved with the project?

((Pablo Greco))  I'm the armhfp maintainer, basically helping out fixing things that are not part of the Red Hat supported architectures.  I do help out with other things like secondary kernels, and creating images for armhfp and aarch64.  I got involved not too long ago when a project that I was working on needed to use ARMv7 hardware, and although CentOS had a version, it wasn't complete.

((Rich Bowen))  I'm Rich Bowen and I'm the Community Manager for the CentOS project.  That means that it's my job to help people get involved in the project, manage the social media and newsletters (the "voice" of the project), and generally work with the community.  I've been at Red Hat for almost 8 years, and during that time have worked in this capacity with a couple of other projects, too.  I've been dedicated to the CentOS Project for going on 3 years now.  And I've been doing open source stuff for about 25 years now.

I should also note that I'm not alone — either on this team, or in responding to these questions.  I have a team of colleagues who help me out with CentOS through the Open Source Program Office (OSPO) at Red Hat, and across the many other departments that are part of the Fedora/Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL)/CentOS projects at Red Hat.

There's also a number of colleagues looking over my shoulder as I write this response, to ensure that I get the story straight.  As a community manager, I'm not the technical expert on all the things, and so I need that support to get the details right in some of your questions.

((WN))  What is the relationship between CentOS and RHEL?

((Pablo Greco))  CentOS started as an external project, that was acquired by Red Hat 7 or 8 years ago.  But I don't think that it counts as an answer.  I think you'll get a better answer from people from Red Hat.

((Rich Bowen))  In many ways, it's the same as it's always been, but with a different end result and project structure.  This is a community-focused open source project that delivers a strong Linux distribution foundation where non-operating-system focused ("layered") open source projects can develop, test, and innovate.  For example, Ceph and RDO.

The main shift with this evolution of a focus on CentOS Stream is how it is developed in the open, in the community space, allowing contributors to get involved in the creation and shaping of the future.  This also means RHEL users, customers, partners, independent hardware/software vendors, and anyone else can participate in the future of RHEL in true open source fashion.

In the past, the relationship between Fedora, RHEL, and CentOS was effectively, "Fedora gets snapshot every so many years, then RHEL engineers develop RHEL behind closed doors until release day, then the RHEL source code is released, then CentOS would take the RHEL source and rebuild."  While that is an oversimplification, it is essentially accurate.  Now the new structure is, "Fedora gets snapshot every so often and becomes the basis for the next CentOS Stream release, then development happens in the open with community contribution involvement and influence, and then RHEL rebases frequently on CentOS Stream."

This moment of integration is called "the development phase" in the RHEL engineering process.  This is being misinterpreted as a "beta".  Rather, this is an aspect of a distribution that is continuously delivered.

This is not software that is untested and not considered ready for inclusion in RHEL.  It is already planned for the next RHEL release, has passed QA [quality assurance] and CI [Continuous Integration] checks, and is considered stable.  In the past, this software went right into RHEL without external visibility.  We don't schedule software for inclusion into RHEL unless it has been used/tested/integrated at other levels (such as Fedora), and is considered stable enough for inclusion.  This same philosophy will still be at play with CentOS Stream.

One thing I would like to highlight here is this is the first time in the history of RHEL that development happens in the open and allows for collaboration and contribution from the broader open source community.  That is a large goal of CentOS Stream and we're making the move to focus on that entirely.

For an example of where this evolution has been discussed in the past, this presentation from Fedora's Flock 2018 "The Penrose Triangle" shows how this problem has been discussed and worked through for a number of years now.

((WN))  How has CentOS evolved after Red Hat acquired it?  How has it evolved since IBM acquired Red Hat last year?

((Rich Bowen))  The biggest change when CentOS came to Red Hat was that individuals who were working on CentOS in their weekends and evenings now had the ability to devote more time to it.

In addition, the project for the first time was able to put significant resources on helping make the platform useful for open source software development of other projects in Red Hat's ecosystem.  This included the expansion of the SIG program [Special Interest Groups] to include layered projects like Gluster, and OpenStack.

IBM is not involved in the CentOS community or Red Hat's work in it.  An unfortunate misconception about this announcement has been conspiracy theories about IBM's involvement in this decision.  Red Hat operates independently from IBM, and IBM had no influence or involvement in the decision.

((WN))  What are the similarities between CentOS, Fedora and RHEL?

((Pablo Greco))  I'm gonna explain in a really loose way, ok?  Fedora is where everything starts, all the fast moving packages.  Some maintained by Red Hat employees, some by contributors.  Every few years, Red Hat gets sort of a snapshot of Fedora, and starts stabilizing and improving it, and that becomes RHEL.  CentOS originally was a rebuild of that.

About 1 year ago, Stream was introduced, as a way to make the work around RHEL more public, allowing the users to contribute.  Making it sort of a continuous preview of what's to come for RHEL.  That doesn't imply anything about it being of lower quality by definition, or some continuous beta like some people call it.  Many of the packages that are built for stream, reach the next version of RHEL unmodified.  So even if there is a higher level of testing in Stream, it is far from a traditional beta.

((Rich Bowen))  They are each Linux distribution projects, which work on a common code base at different points in its life.  It's born in an upstream open source project, and travels through each of the projects as it matures.

From a community perspective, the projects are each run as open, collaborative communities, but with different audiences.  By the time we get to RHEL, it's done inside Red Hat, but that team also operates with the principles of open source.

The exciting thing about CentOS Stream is that it makes RHEL development more open, both in terms of decision making, and in who can participate.  We're believers in the Four Opens, as the OpenStack community talks about them here — https://governance.openstack.org/tc/reference/opens.html

Our roots are in open source, but that's not enough without the other three.

((WN))  What are the similarities and differences between CentOS and CentOS Stream?  Or do they just share the name and are completely different?

((Pablo Greco))  For me, Stream is not CentOS, Stream is the next RHEL, the rest is just branding.

((Rich Bowen))  The name "CentOS" is frequently misused, and has been for a long time, so here are the basics: CentOS is the project.  CentOS Linux is a rebuild of Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL).  CentOS Stream is an upstream distribution from RHEL, which reflects what the RHEL team intend to put into the next minor release of RHEL.  The CentOS Project also contains other things, such as the SIGs (Special Interest Groups), the Promo/Events team, the CI/CD and build system (CBS) project, and so on.

((WN))  Do you have any stats for the userbase of CentOS vs Stream?

((Pablo Greco))  I don't, but Stream is rather new so I don't expect the number to be that big.  I've been using Stream for most of my things ever since it came out, and I love the idea for it.  The only problem is that Stream is being used as an excuse to kill CentOS, and that's the part I hate.

((Rich Bowen))  We don't.  For reasons of privacy, we have never kept server logs around CentOS Linux, and other CentOS Project "downloads."  And these files are served by a large mirror network distributed around the world, much of which we don't have any actual access to.

I put the word downloads in quotes, because installing a Linux distribution isn't exactly just downloading something.  It's composed of thousands of packages which are (can be) installed independently, and figuring out which of those packages are going to CentOS Stream machines, vs CentOS Linux machines (vs Oracle Linux machines, and so on) and which ones are being mirrored for further use by additional users behind a firewall, is a lot of guesswork.

We have some general ideas, but have always been reluctant to try to put actual numbers on it, because of these reasons and others.  Linux user surveys [...] perhaps have a better handle on this than we do, since we have simply never gathered these stats.

((WN))  Could you briefly explain what Red Hat announced and what it means for the future of CentOS?

((Pablo Greco))  They announced that the CentOS as we all know it, doesn't exist anymore, there's only Stream from now on.  This applies to all releases starting with [CentOS] 8, [CentOS] 7 seems to be unaffected by this.  In my view, CentOS is dead, there is no CentOS anymore, because as I said, I view Stream as a RHEL thing and not a CentOS thing.

((WN))  Could you briefly explain Chris Wright's announcement, and what it means for the future of CentOS?

((Rich Bowen))  The future of CentOS is stronger than ever, as it is now literally in the critical path of RHEL development.  The CentOS Project as a community continues, and in fact the community grows more facets as CentOS Stream provides more ways where the community can engage with Red Hat and each other.  There will be some growing pains as users of CentOS Linux find out and help shape whether CentOS Stream meets their needs.  Communities are built in overcoming challenges together, and there are many challenges ahead in making CentOS Stream right for members of the CentOS community.

A major aspect of this is that in the past, CentOS Linux users could not shape the future of the distro within the project.  From now on, not only developers but end users of all types will be able to shape the future of the distro.  If CentOS Stream does not meet a user's need today, now they can advocate and contribute toward it meeting their needs as it evolves.

((WN))  Did Red Hat speak with the CentOS core developer team about this plan?

((Pablo Greco))  I don't have a contractual relation with Red Hat, just as many of the people that helped in the CentOS-QA team.  I assume that those who are knew about this, but the rest of us didn't.  But this is all my assumption, don't have any evidence one way or the other.

((WN))  Did Red Hat speak with the CentOS core developer team about this plan?  Were there any oppositions within Red Hat about this decision?  Was it put to vote?

((Rich Bowen))  Red Hat discussed this with the CentOS Governing Board, which is responsible for the oversight of the CentOS Project.  There was a lot of back-and-forth on that proposal.  The CentOS Governing Board voted and reached consensus.

Red Hat's engineering resource focus has never been decided by voting.  Some of the core developers are on the Governing Board but not everyone in our community was involved in the decision.  As I'll touch on later in this interview, that's one of the reasons that some of the community have taken this change so hard.

Is every Red Hatter happy with the announcement?  Of course not.  A big part of Red Hat's culture is the ability to voice an opinion and ask hard questions.  And Red Hatters have definitely expressed their thoughts about this.

((WN))  Do you know why this sudden move from Red Hat?

((Pablo Greco))  No idea, I can assume it was a business decision, but no information whatsoever.

((Rich Bowen))  CentOS Stream was introduced in September 2019, so while the news may have come as a surprise to many, Red Hat has also had that time to get feedback on CentOS Stream and see momentum that reinforced the role it believed CentOS Stream could fit in the RHEL ecosystem.  I've seen Red Hat's VP of Linux Engineering explain the timing internally — once Red Hat took the decision to the CentOS Governing Board and the Board had voted, they all thought it was important and most transparent for the community leadership to communicate that decision as soon as possible.

((WN))  Why has the End of Life [EOL] been shortened?

((Pablo Greco))  Good question, I don't have an answer for it.  I guess someone from Red Hat should give you that.  I'm not happy about it to say the least.

((WN))  Why has the EOL been shortened?  Is this unusual?

((Rich Bowen))  First, it's important to understand that the dates that the CentOS project lists as EOL (End Of Life) dates are, and always have been, dependent on Red Hat.  That is, we can say that CentOS Linux 7 will be EOL on a particular date, but if the dates around RHEL 7 shift, hypothetically speaking, then so will those around CentOS Linux 7.  That's what happened with CentOS Linux 8.  This decision was made by Red Hat and the CentOS Board.

((WN))  What are some of the reasons people consider CentOS for their daily driver or for their servers?

((Pablo Greco))  It used to be rock solid distribution, with almost everything that RHEL has, but without all the hassle or the costs of a RHEL license, and obviously without the main benefit of RHEL which is the support.  CentOS 7 still fits that description.

((Rich Bowen))  Besides the obvious cost benefits of running CentOS Linux, many users find that the friction of running CentOS Linux is much lower than other options.  There's no web form, registration, or subscription management.  And while these frictions are things that the RHEL subscription team is actively working on, this remains part of our users' mindset.

((WN))  How different are CentOS 7 and CentOS 8?

((Rich Bowen))  Upgrades between major release versions provide a chance to provide the latest versions of packages to our users.  A major release will stay on these base package versions for the releases' lifecycle.  The "rebasing" of packages allows us to incorporate all of the fixes and enhancements that have occurred between major releases and ensure we maintain the balance of upstream momentum, with the stability that backporting patches and fixes provides.

((Pablo Greco))  In some ways, very different, Modularity may be the biggest, many new versions of things (there was a 5 year gap between 7 and 8).  But for the most part, usage is the same as it has been forever, like in things like repos [repositories], installing and removing packages, building packages, etc.

((WN))  Would it be feasible for the developers to fork CentOS 8 after EOL, to continue developing the OS?

((Rich Bowen))  We've actually covered this in the FAQ that we published on Tuesday.  The short answer is yes, and we fully expect that to happen.  Indeed, the Rocky Linux project has already indicated their intention to do just that.

There's also ongoing discussion on the CentOS Project mailing lists of how this could be done within the community itself.

((Pablo Greco))  Very, to me the most difficult part of coming up with a new fork is the human factor.  The technical side may have its complications (many to mention), but at the end of the day, they are solvable.

((WN))  Will Red Hat employees be barred from contributing to any community-driven development of forks of CentOS?

((Rich Bowen))  A large part of Red Hat's culture is ingrained in the idea of open source and community.  Red Hat will never prevent its employees from pursuing upstream development and open source projects.

I think section 6 [of Red Hat's Open source participation guidelines] "Contributing to upstream projects not maintained by Red Hat" applies here.

((WN))  What are the implications of this move for the userbase?

((Pablo Greco))  Where to start?  There are too many cases in the userbase to mention, but taking some examples.  If you have a fast deploying platform (like the Facebook example given in the press release), and you take advantage of the benefit of Stream even with the shortened EOL, this may not even affect you.  But in my opinion, this is not the majority.  Most users wanted CentOS for its premise of being bug-for-bug compatible with RHEL, and since that option doesn't exist anymore, until a suitable replacement appears, things are going to be complicated.  I guess I could extend this by a lot, but that's the gist.

Depending on your use case, you may be unaffected, or have a really complicated year ahead of you. I think very few people will be unaffected.

((WN))  Is the success of Stream somehow responsible for this move?

((Pablo Greco))  In my opinion, no.  The need for Stream to succeed maybe, but I just don't see Stream succeeding under the new conditions.

((WN))  Is the success of CentOS Stream somehow responsible for this? In the announcement, Wright said Stream was not the replacement for CentOS. What is the possible solution for those who relied on CentOS?

((Rich Bowen))  CentOS Stream is not a drop-in replacement for all existing use cases.  It requires sysadmins out there to evaluate the new information and adjust their workflows.  We would do our user base a disservice to claim otherwise.  For many use cases it can be used as a replacement.  Indeed, for people who wanted the stability of the CentOS Linux base operating system, but were frustrated by the slowness of application updates, CentOS Stream will be a better replacement for CentOS Linux — now those updates will be available sooner, should users choose to update.

We also want people to understand the difference, so they can see the additional options it brings to them.  We want people to go into this decision with eyes open, and not expect it to be something that it's not.

((WN))  What can be done for those users for whom CentOS Stream does not meet their requirements?

((Pablo Greco))  Pay for RHEL, move to another distribution, or wait for someone to fill in the gap.  If someone has another solution, I'm all ears.

((Rich Bowen))  We hope any users who are in that situation will tell us, so we can figure out how to fix that failing.  One of the exciting things about the move to CentOS Stream is it's designed to be an actual contributor community, rather than the legacy CentOS Linux that is almost entirely a consumer community.

CentOS Stream is more than just something you download and install.  It's a process and a community — a venue for contributing changes, making suggestions, and reporting bugs.  All of that feeds back into making CentOS Stream better, and, in turn, making RHEL better.

That said, Red Hat is working on some "low- or no-cost programs" for users who cannot, for whatever reason, deploy CentOS Stream in their environment. This is discussed in the Red Hat announcement and we anticipate hearing more details around that in the coming weeks.

((WN))  What are some of the best arguments in favour of, and against this move that you are aware of?

((Pablo Greco))  I have nothing positive to say about the announcement, let's just leave it at that.  [About against the move,] I can't put it into words you can publish.

((Rich Bowen))  While I empathize with users' response to the decision, I believe that shifting focus to CentOS Stream is the right solution for our community, in the longer term.

CentOS Stream creates a place where the community can actually participate in the development of the OS on which they rely.  They can now actually file bugs against it and have those considered by the engineering team.  They can submit their own changes to the project and expect that they will actually be considered and accepted into the code.

The arguments against it have been made eloquently elsewhere, and if I can summarize them, they would be timing (dropping the announcement right on the heels of the CentOS 6 Linux EOL) and timing (cutting the maintenance lifetime of CentOS Linux 8 from 10 years to 2).

((WN))  How will this move affect the development of RHEL, and other GNU/Linux?

((Rich Bowen))  RHEL maintainers try to do as much work as possible "upstream first". This means starting in upstream open source projects like the kernel, then participating in Fedora, then bringing those changes in for RHEL.  CentOS Stream gives RHEL maintainers a place to collaborate with the community in public on what's coming for the next minor release.

((Pablo Greco))  I don't think this will affect other distros in a negative way, quite the contrary.  With respect to RHEL development, depends on how much people contribute to Stream.  If people contribute to it, it will make RHEL a better product, because it will have a broader testing in the earlier stages.  But that's just the benefit of stream.  I mean, this was still true before the announcement.

((WN))  Will the maintainers appoint some new maintainers (not necessarily Red Hat employees) to see some development?  Can the current maintainers continue to work on CentOS in their spare time?

((Pablo Greco))  As far as I understand, no.  CentOS is a trademark of Red Hat, so anything would have to be done on the outside.  But I'm not a lawyer, and I think you should get a formal answer to that from someone who represents Red Hat.

((WN))  What does the strong reaction from the CentOS community indicate?

((Pablo Greco))  For me it indicates that Red Hat didn't expect this, or that they did expect it and were prepared to handle it.  I don't like any of the options.

((WN))  What is the reason for such a strong reaction from the CentOS community?  Had Red Hat considered this while making this move?  How are they planning to handle it?

((Rich Bowen))  Open source communities are often very passionate about their projects.  The very nature of open source means that each person has equal ownership of the project.  So the strong reaction here is understandable.  A decision was made outside of their view, which they would not have made themselves.  That makes people feel betrayed.  We get that.

And, yes, we discussed, in the leadup to this, how it would affect people, and that they would be angry.  We tried to minimize that, but we understand community skepticism about that statement.  It's a big change, being made quickly, and driven by business needs that the majority of our user community doesn't know or particularly care about.

I've talked in other places about the stages of grief.  The community has lost something, and they are grieving that.  Part of that process is anger.  This is neither unexpected nor strange in any way.

We also understand that this explanation rings hollow to some, and sounds like, "We considered that and then decided to ignore it."  That's not the case, but we understand why some people feel that it is.

How are we planning to handle it?  By ensuring that CentOS Stream lives up to our promises by doing rather than talking.  I'm here, as the community manager, to help people find the solutions that they need, and to help them navigate this period of transition.

((WN))  How many core developers are there, who are not working for Red Hat?

((Pablo Greco))  The CentOS QA team which handles most of the day-to-day things, are about 20 people, most of which are not Red Hat employees, like myself.

((WN))  How do you think Fedora now fits in the grand scheme of Red Hat development?

((Pablo Greco))  Fedora is still the upstream for whatever comes to RHEL, and is where most of the big changes happen.  So in my opinion, Red Hat needs a stable and vibrant Fedora.

((WN))  Many users are calling it "The death of CentOS".  Do you agree with that?  Will the maintainers appoint some new maintainers (not necessarily Red Hat employees) to see some development?  Can the current maintainers continue to work on CentOS in their spare time?

((Rich Bowen))  No, obviously I do not agree that this is the death of CentOS.  As I said earlier, CentOS is a project with multiple outputs, and the remaining outputs are still important both to CentOS users and to Red Hat.  The project continues, it just looks different now, with a different primary focus.

That said, we totally understand community members who feel that we have killed the part of the project that they care about, and that, to them, this means the death of the project.  That's not confusing or surprising at all.

In the coming year, we hope to demonstrate that CentOS Stream is every bit as useful, to most of our users, as CentOS Linux was.  And for the users for whom it is not as useful, we will strive to understand why, and whether we can address that gap.

The very first sentence of my blog post on Tuesday was "The future of the CentOS Project is CentOS Stream."  Clearly that implies that I don't believe that this is the end of the line, or the death of the project.  Our job going forward is to demonstrate the value of CentOS Stream, and build the contributor community around it.

((WN))  How can an open source project ensure situations like these do not repeat?

((Pablo Greco))  Wish I knew, maybe not letting for-profit companies dictate the future of non-profit organizations/distributions.  Unfortunately, I don't think I'm equipped to solve that :(

((Rich Bowen))  All projects in the open source ecosystem are unique and face unique challenges.  We would not presume to try to predict how to anticipate another project's issues.


紅帽將重點從CentOS轉移到Stream 維基新聞專訪CentOS團隊

週二，美國軟件公司紅帽宣佈，他們計劃將重心從CentOS轉向CentOS Stream。

紅帽技術總監（CTO）Chris Wright在博客中表示，紅帽已經通知CentOS管理委員會，紅帽正在「將我們的投資完全從CentOS Linux轉向CentOS Stream」。在項目中列出的9個CentOS管理委員會中，至少有5個是紅帽員工。

CentOS始於2004年，一直是一個免費的libre開源軟件，它提供了與紅帽企業Linux（RHEL）──紅帽的GNU通用公共授權付費操作系統的二進制代碼兼容性。CentOS在2014年被紅帽吸收，紅帽獲得了「CentOS」的商標權。

紅帽還贊助了Fedora操作系統。紅帽甚至給軟件工程實習生提供了搭載Fedora的手提電腦。直到現在，軟件開發都是在Fedora上進行的，後來Fedora被採用在RHEL上，紅帽為那些訂閱了RHEL的客戶維護並提供支持。隨後CentOS會跟隨RHEL免費提供同樣的功能，但不提供支持。

Stream是在2019年9月宣佈的，也就是紅帽被IBM收購後的兩個月。CentOS Stream的開發週期在功能成為RHEL的一部分之前，就有新的功能加入其中。Stream收到更頻繁的更新，然而，它並不遵循RHEL的發佈週期。

對於CentOS Stream，來自社區和紅帽的職員的開發會事先在Fedora上進行，而Stream作為滾動發佈，在這些特性被吸收到RHEL中之前。CentOS跟隨RHEL的發佈週期，因此它是一個穩定的發行版。CentOS中可用的功能是由Fedora，然後是RHEL的維護者進行試用和測試的。另一方面，Stream在這些特性成為RHEL的一部分之前，就已經加入了一些特性。這就意味着Stream會領先於RHEL的發展，包含一些新的特性，這些特性還沒有經過RHEL開發者的嘗試和測試，而且與RHEL的二進制代碼不兼容。

Wright在公告中寫道：「CentOS Linux的未來是CentOS Stream，」他進一步寫道，「CentOS Stream為社區層面的快速創新提供了一個平台，但又有足夠穩定的基礎來了解生產動態。」Wright還表示：「CentOS Stream並不是CentOS Linux的替代品，相反，它是一個自然的、不可避免的下一步，旨在實現項目進一步推動企業Linux創新的目標。」

自公告發佈以來，許多人在互聯網社交平台（IRC）、Reddit和CentOS項目的郵件列表上表達了他們的憤怒。CentOS 8的生命終結（EOL）已經從2029年5月提前到2021年12月31日，而CentOS 7預計將在2024年6月之前獲得維護更新，超過CentOS 8的壽命。

曾啟動CentOS項目的Gregory Kurtzer宣佈了一個新的操作系統Rocky Linux。Rocky Linux將自己描述為「一個社區企業操作系統，旨在100%兼容企業Linux的bug。」該項目表示，「Rocky Linux的目標是像CentOS之前那樣，作為下游構建的功能，在上游廠商加入版本後，而不是在之前構建版本。」該項目維護者還沒有決定操作系統發佈的日期。

Kurtzer解釋了將該操作系統稱為Rocky Linux的原因：「回想早期的CentOS時代……我的聯合創始人是Rocky McGaugh。他已經不在我們身邊了，所以作為對他的H/T帽子提示，他沒能看到CentOS的成功，我向你介紹……Rocky Linux。」

英文維基新聞聯繫了CentOS項目的成員Pablo Greco和Rich Bowen，討論了這一舉動、其影響以及CentOS的未來。Greco是armhfp（32位處理器）的維護者，也是CentOS質量保證團隊的一員。Bowen與Greco不同，他在Red Hat工作，是CentOS項目的社區經理。

能否介紹一下你目前在CentOS開發中的角色，以及你是如何參與到這個項目中的？

Pablo Greco 我是armhfp的維護者，基本上是幫助修復那些不屬於紅帽支持架構的東西。我也幫助一些其他事情，比如輔助內核，以及為armhfp和arch64創建鏡像。不久前，我參與了一個項目，當時我正在做的一個項目需要使用ARMv7硬件，雖然CentOS有一個版本，但並不完整。

Rich Bowen 我是Rich Bowen，我是CentOS項目的社區經理。這意味着我的工作是幫助人們參與到這個項目中來，管理社交媒體和通訊（項目的「聲音」），以及一般的社區工作。我在紅帽工作了近8年，期間也以這個身份參與了其他幾個項目。我致力於CentOS項目已經有3年了。而我做開源的事情已經有25年了。

我還應該指出，我不是一個人──無論是在這個團隊中，還是在回答這些問題時。我有一個同事團隊，他們通過紅帽公司的開源項目辦公室（OSPO），以及紅帽公司Fedora/Red Hat Enterprise Linux（RHEL）/CentOS項目的許多其他部門，幫助我處理CentOS問題。

在我寫這篇回應的時候，也有很多同事在看着我，以確保我把來龍去脈講清楚。作為一個社區經理，我並不是所有事情的技術專家，所以我需要這種支持，才能把你的一些問題中的細節說清楚。

WN CentOS和RHEL是甚麼關係？

Pablo Greco CentOS是作為一個外部項目開始的，7、8年前被紅帽收購了。但我不認為這算得上是一個答案。我想你會從紅帽的人那裏得到更好的答案。

Rich Bowen 在很多方面，它和以往一樣，但最終結果和項目結構不同。這是一個以社區為中心的開源項目，它提供了一個強大的Linux發行版基礎，在這個基礎上，專注於非操作系統（「分層」）的開源項目可以開發、測試和創新。例如，Ceph和RDO。

這種專注於CentOS Stream的演變，主要的轉變是如何在開放的社區空間中開發，讓貢獻者參與到未來的創造和塑造中。這也意味着RHEL的用戶、客戶、合作伙伴、獨立硬件或軟件廠商以及其他任何人都可以以真正的開源方式參與到RHEL的未來。

在過去，Fedora、RHEL和CentOS之間的關係實際上是：「Fedora每隔這麼多年就會有一次快照，然後RHEL工程師閉門造車開發RHEL，直到發佈日，然後RHEL源代碼發佈，然後CentOS會拿着RHEL的源代碼重建。」雖然這是一個過於簡單化的說法，但基本上是準確的。現在新的結構是：「Fedora每隔一段時間就會得到快照，並成為下一個CentOS Stream發佈的基礎，然後在社區貢獻的參與和影響下公開進行開發，然後RHEL在CentOS Stream上頻繁地進行重建。」

在RHEL工程過程中，這個整合的時刻被稱為「開發階段」（Development Phase），這被誤解為「測試版」（Beta）。相反，這是一個持續交付的發行版的一個方面。

這不是未經測試的軟件，也不是被認為可以納入RHEL的軟件。它已經被計劃在下一個RHEL版本中使用，已經通過了QA質量保證和CI持續集成檢查，並且被認為是穩定的。在過去，這個軟件在沒有外部可見性的情況下直接進入RHEL。我們不會安排軟件加入RHEL，除非它已經在其他級別（如Fedora）使用測試集成，並且被認為足夠穩定。同樣的理念也將在CentOS Stream中發揮作用。

我想在這裏強調的一點是，這是RHEL歷史上第一次在開放中進行開發，並允許更廣泛的開源社區進行協作和貢獻。這也是CentOS Stream的一大目標，我們此舉完全是為了關注這一點。

關於過去討論過這種演變的例子，Fedora的Flock 2018「彭羅斯三角」的這個演講展示了這個問題是如何被討論和解決的，已經有很多年了。

WN 紅帽收購CentOS後發展如何？IBM去年收購紅帽後，它的發展情況如何？

Rich Bowen 當CentOS來到紅帽時，最大的變化是那些在週末和晚上從事CentOS工作的個人現在有能力將更多的時間投入其中。

此外，這個項目第一次能夠把大量的資源放在幫助使這個平台對紅帽生態系統中其他項目的開源軟件開發有用。這包括擴大SIG項目特殊興趣小組的範圍，將Gluster、OpenStack等分層項目納入其中。

IBM沒有參與CentOS社區或紅帽在其中的工作。關於這個公告的一個不幸的誤解是關於IBM參與這個決定的陰謀論。紅帽獨立於IBM運營，IBM沒有影響或參與這個決定。

WN CentOS、Fedora和RHEL之間有甚麼相似之處？

Pablo Greco 我會用一種非常寬鬆的方式來解釋，好嗎？Fedora是一切的開始，所有快速移動的軟件包。有些由Red Hat員工維護，有些由貢獻者維護。每隔幾年，Red Hat就會得到Fedora的某種快照，並開始穩定和改進它，這就是RHEL。CentOS最初就是在這個基礎上重建的。

大約一年前，Stream被引入，作為一種讓RHEL的工作更加公開的方式，允許用戶做出貢獻。讓它成為RHEL未來發展的一種持續預覽。這並不意味着任何關於它的定義是低質量的，或者像一些人所說的連續測試版。許多為流構建的軟件包，都是在沒有修改的情況下到達下一個版本的RHEL。所以，即使在Stream中存在更高級別的測試，它也遠不是傳統的測試版。

Rich Bowen 它們各自是Linux發行項目，在生命的不同階段在一個共同的代碼庫上工作。它誕生於一個上游的開源項目中，並在每個項目的成熟過程中穿行。

從社區的角度來看，這些項目都是以開放、協作的社區形式運行的，但受眾不同。到了RHEL，它是在紅帽內部完成的，但那個團隊也是以開源的原則來運作。

CentOS Stream令人興奮的地方在於，它讓RHEL的開發更加開放，無論是在決策方面，還是在誰可以參與方面。我們是「四個開放」的信徒，OpenStack社區在這裏談到了「四個開放」──https://governance.openstack.org/tc/reference/opens.html

我們的根基在開源，但沒有其他三者是不夠的。

WN CentOS和CentOS Stream的異同點是甚麼？還是它們只是同名，完全不同？

Pablo Greco 對我來說，Stream不是CentOS，Stream是下一個RHEL，其他的只是品牌。

Rich Bowen 「CentOS」這個名字經常被誤用，而且已經有很長一段時間了，所以這裏是基本情況。CentOS是一個項目. CentOS Linux是紅帽企業Linux（RHEL）的重建版。CentOS Stream是RHEL的上游發行版，它反映了RHEL團隊打算在RHEL的下一個小版本中投入的內容。CentOS項目還包含了其他的東西，比如SIGs（特殊興趣小組）、Promo/Events團隊、CI/CD和構建系統（CBS）項目等等。

WN 你有CentOS與Stream的用戶群統計嗎？

Pablo Greco 我沒有，但Stream是相當新的，所以我不期望這個數字有多大。自從Stream出現以來，我的大部分事情都在使用它，我喜歡它的想法。唯一的問題是，Stream被用來作為殺死CentOS的藉口，這是我討厭的部分。

Rich Bowen 我們沒有。出於私隱的考慮，我們從來沒有保留過圍繞CentOS Linux，以及其他CentOS項目「下載」的伺服器日誌。而這些文件是由分佈在世界各地的大型鏡像網絡提供服務的，其中大部分我們沒有任何實際訪問權限。

我把下載這個詞加了引號，因為安裝一個Linux發行版並不完全只是下載一些東西。它是由成千上萬個包組成的，這些包是（可以）獨立安裝的，要弄清楚這些包中哪些是要去CentOS Stream機器，與CentOS Linux機器（與Oracle Linux機器，等等），哪些是被鏡像到防火牆後面供其他用戶進一步使用的，這是一個很大的猜測。

我們有一些大致的想法，但由於這些原因和其他原因，我們一直不願意把實際的數字放在上面。Linux用戶調查也許比我們更有把握，因為我們根本就沒有收集過這些統計數據。

WN 你能簡單解釋一下紅帽公司宣佈的內容，以及它對CentOS的未來意味着甚麼嗎？

Pablo Greco 他們宣佈，我們所熟知的CentOS，已經不存在了，從現在開始只有Stream了。這適用於從CentOS 8開始的所有版本，CentOS 7似乎不受此影響。在我看來，CentOS已經死了，沒有CentOS了，因為我說過，我認為Stream是RHEL的事情，而不是CentOS的事情。

WN 你能簡單解釋一下Chris Wright的聲明，以及它對CentOS的未來意味着甚麼嗎？

Rich Bowen CentOS的未來比以往任何時候都要強大，因為它現在已經名副其實地進入了RHEL發展的關鍵路徑。CentOS項目作為一個社區仍在繼續，事實上，隨着CentOS Stream提供了更多的方式，社區可以與紅帽和其他社區進行互動，社區也在不斷發展。當CentOS Linux的用戶發現並幫助塑造CentOS Stream是否滿足他們的需求時，會有一些成長的痛苦。社區是在共同克服挑戰的過程中建立起來的，在使CentOS Stream適合CentOS社區成員的過程中，未來還有很多挑戰。

其中一個重要的方面是，在過去，CentOS Linux用戶無法在項目內塑造發行版的未來。從現在開始，不僅是開發者，而且各種類型的終端用戶都能塑造發行版的未來。如果CentOS Stream今天還不能滿足用戶的需求，那麼現在他們就可以在CentOS Stream發展的過程中，為它滿足他們的需求做出倡導和貢獻。

WN 紅帽是否與CentOS核心開發團隊談過這個計劃？

Pablo Greco 我和紅帽沒有合同關係，就像很多在CentOS-QA團隊中幫忙的人一樣。我假設那些人知道這件事，但我們其他人不知道。但這都是我的假設，沒有任何證據。

WN 紅帽是否與CentOS核心開發者團隊討論過這個計劃？RH內部對這個決定有甚麼反對意見嗎？是否進行了投票？

Rich Bowen 紅帽公司與負責監督CentOS項目的CentOS管理委員會討論了這個問題。關於這個提議，大家反反覆覆討論了很多。CentOS理事會進行了投票，並達成了共識。

紅帽的工程資源重點從來沒有通過投票來決定。一些核心開發人員是理事會的成員，但並不是我們社區的所有人都參與了決定。正如我在後面的採訪中會提到的那樣，這也是一些社區對這一變化如此看重的原因之一。

每個紅帽子都對這個公告感到高興嗎？當然不是。紅帽文化的一個重要部分就是能夠發表意見，提出難以回答的問題。而紅帽們也確實表達了他們對此的想法。

WN 你知道為甚麼紅帽會突然有這樣的舉動嗎？

Pablo Greco 不知道，我可以認為這是一個商業決策，但沒有任何訊息。

Rich Bowen CentOS Stream是在2019年9月推出的，所以雖然這個消息可能讓很多人感到意外，但紅帽也有這個時間來獲得CentOS Stream的反饋，並看到了加強其相信CentOS Stream可以在RHEL生態系統中發揮作用的勢頭。我已經看到紅帽的Linux工程副總裁在內部解釋了這個時機──一旦紅帽把這個決定提交給CentOS理事會，並且理事會已經進行了投票，他們都認為社區領導層儘快傳達這個決定是很重要的，也是最透明的。

WN 生命末期[EOL]為何縮短了？

Pablo Greco 好問題，我沒有答案。我想紅帽公司的人應該會給你這個答案。至少可以這麼說，我並不高興。

WN 為甚麼EOL會縮短？這是否不尋常？

Rich Bowen 首先，重要的是要明白，CentOS 項目列出的 EOL（End Of Life）日期是，而且一直都是，取決於 Red Hat。也就是說，我們可以說 CentOS Linux 7 將會在某個特定的日期被 EOL，但是如果 RHEL 7 周邊的日期發生了變化，假設說，那麼 CentOS Linux 7 周邊的日期也會發生變化。這就是 CentOS Linux 8 所發生的事情。這個決定是由 Red Hat 和 CentOS 董事會做出的。

WN 人們考慮將CentOS作為日常驅動或伺服器的原因有哪些？

Pablo Greco 它曾經是一個堅如磐石的發行版，幾乎擁有RHEL所擁有的一切，但卻沒有RHEL許可證的所有麻煩或成本，顯然也沒有RHEL的主要優勢，即支持。CentOS 7仍然符合這個描述。

Rich Bowen 除了運行CentOS Linux明顯的成本優勢外，許多用戶發現運行CentOS Linux的摩擦力比其他選擇低得多。沒有網絡表格、註冊或訂閱管理。而這些摩擦是RHEL訂閱團隊正在積極努力的事情，但這仍然是我們用戶的一部分想法。

WN CentOS 7和CentOS 8有甚麼不同？

Rich Bowen 主要版本之間的升級為我們的用戶提供了一個提供最新版本軟件包的機會。一個主要的發行版將在發行版的生命週期中保持在這些基礎包版本上。軟件包的「重新設定」（Rebasing）使我們能夠將主要版本之間發生的所有修復和增強功能整合在一起，並確保我們保持上游動力的平衡，以及回溯補丁和修復所提供的穩定性。

Pablo Greco 在某些方面，非常不同，模塊化可能是最大的，很多新版本的東西（7和8之間有5年的差距）。但大多數情況下，用法和一直以來都是一樣的，比如在repos[倉庫]、安裝和刪除包、構建包等方面。

WN 開發者在EOL後分叉CentOS 8，繼續開發操作系統是否可行？

Rich Bowen 事實上，我們已經在週二發佈的常見問題中涵蓋了這一點。簡而言之，答案是肯定的，我們完全期待這種情況的發生。事實上，Rocky Linux項目已經表示他們打算這樣做。

在CentOS項目的郵件列表中，也在不斷討論如何在社區本身內實現這一點。

Pablo Greco 非常，對我來說，想出一個新的分叉最困難的部分是人的因素。技術方面可能會有複雜的問題（有很多需要提及），但最終，這些問題是可以解決的。

WN 紅帽員工是否會被禁止參與任何社區驅動的CentOS的分叉開發？

Rich Bowen 紅帽的文化中很大一部分根植於開源和社區的理念。紅帽永遠不會阻止其員工追求上游開發和開源項目。

我認為紅帽的開源參與指南第六節「為非紅帽維護的上游項目做貢獻」在這裏適用。

WN 此舉對用戶群有甚麼影響？

Pablo Greco 從哪裏開始呢？用戶群中的案例太多，不一一列舉，但舉一些例子。如果你有一個快速部署的平台（比如新聞稿中給出的Facebook的例子），而且你利用Stream的好處，即使縮短了EOL，這可能都不會影響到你。但在我看來，這不是大多數。大多數用戶想要CentOS的前提是它與RHEL兼容的bug，既然這個選項已經不存在了，那麼在合適的替代品出現之前，事情就會變得很複雜。我想我可以擴展很多，但這就是要點。

根據你的用例，你可能不受影響，或者未來一年會很複雜。我想很少有人會不受影響。

WN Stream的成功是否是此舉的某種原因呢？

Pablo Greco 在我看來，沒有。Stream成功的必要性也許是，但我就是不認為溪Stream在新的條件下能成功。

WN CentOS Stream的成功是否有某種程度上的原因？在公告中，Wright說Stream不是CentOS的替代品。對於那些依賴CentOS的人來說，可能的解決方案是甚麼？

Rich Bowen CentOS Stream並不是所有現有用例的即插即用的替代品。它需要系統管理員評估新的訊息並調整他們的工作流程。如果我們不這麼認為，那對我們的用戶群是一種傷害。對於許多用例來說，它可以作為一種替代。事實上，對於那些想要CentOS Linux基礎操作系統的穩定性，但又對應用更新的緩慢感到失望的人來說，CentOS Stream將是CentOS Linux的一個更好的替代品──現在，如果用戶選擇更新，這些更新將更快地得到。

我們也希望人們了解兩者的區別，這樣他們就能看到它給他們帶來的額外選擇。我們希望人們在做這個決定的時候能夠睜大眼睛，而不是期望它是一個不一樣的東西。

WN 對於那些CentOS Stream不能滿足其要求的用戶，該如何處理？

Pablo Greco 花錢買RHEL，轉移到另一個發行版，或者等待有人來填補這個空白。如果有人有其他解決方案，我洗耳恭聽。

Rich Bowen 我們希望任何有這種情況的用戶都能告訴我們，這樣我們就可以想辦法修復這個故障。轉移到CentOS Stream的一個令人興奮的事情是它被設計成一個真正的貢獻者社區，而不是傳統的CentOS Linux幾乎完全是一個消費者社區。

CentOS Stream 不僅僅是你下載和安裝的東西，它是一個過程，也是一個社區。它是一個過程，也是一個社區──一個提供修改、提出建議和報告錯誤的場所。所有這些都會反過來讓CentOS Stream變得更好，進而讓RHEL變得更好。

也就是說，紅帽正在為那些由於某種原因無法在其環境中部署CentOS Stream的用戶開發一些「低成本或無成本的方案」。紅帽公告中討論了這個問題，我們預計在未來幾週會聽到更多圍繞這個問題的細節。

WN 據你所知，支持和反對此舉的最佳論據是甚麼？

Pablo Greco 關於公告，我沒有甚麼正面的評價，就這樣吧。關於反對的舉動，我無法用你能發表的文字來表達。

Rich Bowen 雖然我很理解用戶對這個決定的反應，但我相信，從長遠來看，將焦點轉移到CentOS Stream是我們社區的正確解決方案。

CentOS Stream為社區創造了一個可以真正參與他們所依賴的操作系統開發的地方。他們現在可以針對它提出錯誤，並讓工程團隊考慮這些錯誤。他們可以向項目提交自己的修改，並期望這些修改能夠被考慮並被納入代碼。

反對的論點在其他地方已經有雄辯的論述，如果我可以總結一下的話，那就是時機（在CentOS 6 Linux EOL結束後立即宣佈）和時間（將CentOS Linux 8的維護壽命從10年縮短到2年）。

WN 此舉將如何影響RHEL以及其他GNU/Linux的發展？

Rich Bowen RHEL的維護者們儘量「先做上游的工作」。這意味着從上游的開源項目開始，比如內核，然後參與Fedora，再把這些變化帶入RHEL。CentOS Stream為RHEL維護者提供了一個公開與社區合作的地方，讓他們了解下一個小版本的內容。

Pablo Greco 我不認為這會對其他發行版產生負面影響，恰恰相反。關於RHEL的發展，要看人們對Stream的貢獻有多大。如果人們對它有貢獻，它將使RHEL成為一個更好的產品，因為它將在早期階段有更廣泛的測試。但這只是Stream的好處。我的意思是，這在宣佈之前還是真實的。

WN 維護者是否會任命一些新的維護者（不一定是紅帽的員工）來看一些發展？目前的維護人員能否在業餘時間繼續從事CentOS的工作？

Pablo Greco 據我所知，沒有。CentOS 是 Red Hat 的商標，所以任何事情都必須在外部進行。但我不是律師，我想你應該從代表Red Hat的人那裏得到一個正式的答案。

WN CentOS社區的強烈反應說明了甚麼？

Pablo Greco 對我來說，這表明紅帽公司沒有預料到這一點，或者說他們確實預料到了，並且已經做好了處理的準備。我不喜歡任何一個選項。

WN CentOS社區反應如此強烈的原因是甚麼？紅帽在做出此舉時是否考慮過這個問題？他們打算如何處理？

Rich Bowen 開放源碼社區往往對其項目充滿激情。開源的本質意味着每個人對項目都有平等的所有權。所以這裏的強烈反應是可以理解的。在他們的觀點之外，做出了一個他們自己不會做出的決定。這讓人們感到被背叛了。我們明白這一點。

而且，是的，我們討論了，在這之前，它將如何影響人們，他們會感到憤怒。我們試圖儘量減少這一點， 但我們理解社區懷疑 關於該聲明。這是一個很大的變化，正在迅速地進行，並且是由我們大多數用戶社區不知道或特別關心的業務需求所驅動的。

我在其他地方談過悲傷的階段。社區失去了一些東西，他們正在悲傷。這個過程的一部分是憤怒。這既不意外，也不奇怪。

我們也理解這種解釋對一些人來說是空洞的，聽起來像是「我們考慮過，然後決定忽略它」。事實並非如此，但我們理解為甚麼有些人覺得是這樣。

我們打算如何處理它？通過確保CentOS Stream不辜負我們的承諾，通過做而不是說。作為社區經理，我在這裏是為了幫助人們找到他們所需要的解決方案，並幫助他們度過這個過渡時期。

WN 有多少核心開發人員，不在紅帽工作？

Pablo Greco 處理大部分日常事務的CentOS QA團隊，大約有20人，其中大部分不是紅帽員工，比如我自己。

WN 您認為現在的Fedora在紅帽發展的大計劃中是如何安排的？

Pablo Greco Fedora仍然是RHEL的上游，也是大部分重大變化發生的地方。所以在我看來，紅帽需要一個穩定而有活力的Fedora。

WN 很多網友都稱其為「CentOS之死」。你同意這種說法嗎？維護者是否會任命一些新的維護者（不一定是紅帽的員工）來看一些發展？目前的維護者能否在業餘時間繼續從事CentOS的工作？

Rich Bowen 不，顯然我不同意這是CentOS的死亡。正如我前面所說，CentOS是一個有多種產出的項目，其餘的產出對CentOS用戶和Red Hat來說仍然很重要。這個項目還在繼續，只是現在看起來不一樣了，有了不同的主要關注點。

也就是說，我們完全理解社區成員覺得我們已經殺死了他們關心的那部分項目，對他們來說，這意味着項目的死亡。這一點也不令人困惑或驚訝。

在未來的一年裏，我們希望能夠證明CentOS Stream對於大多數用戶來說，和CentOS Linux一樣有用。對於那些不那麼有用的用戶，我們將努力了解其原因，以及我們是否能解決這一差距。

週二我的博文的第一句話就是「CentOS項目的未來是CentOS Stream」。顯然，這意味着我不相信這是終點，也不相信項目的死亡。我們未來的工作是展示CentOS Stream的價值，並圍繞它建立貢獻者社區。

WN 一個開源項目如何確保類似的情況不再發生？

Pablo Greco 但願我知道，也許不能讓營利性公司決定非營利組織或發行的未來。不幸的是，我不認為我有能力解決這個問題:(

Rich Bowen 開源生態系統中的所有項目都是獨一無二的，面臨着獨特的挑戰。我們不會妄圖試圖預測如何預測另一個項目的問題。


Remaining Expedition 25 crew launch to space

The Soyuz TMA-01M spacecraft launched from Kazakhstan to the International Space Station Thursday with Expedition 25 Astronaut Scott Kelly and Cosmonauts Oleg Skripochka and Alexander Kaleri on board.

The rocket, a Soyuz-FG, launched at 23:10 UTC (5:10 AM Kazakhstan time) and reached orbit in just under ten minutes. The Soyuz launched from the Baikonur Cosmodrome.

The crew members of Soyuz TMA-01M will join fellow Expedition 25 crew members Doug Wheelock, Fyodor Yurchikhin and Shannon Walker aboard the space station on Saturday. Docking is expected to occur at about 8:02 PM EDT (0:02 UTC Sunday) to the Poisk module of the ISS. Upon arrival, the remaining Expedition 25 crew will begin a five month stay aboard the space station.

The Soyuz TMA-01M mission is the 107th flight utilizing the Soyuz spacecraft and the first to utilize digital flight control systems.


Sojuz TMA-22 wystartował

W poniedziałek 14 listopada 2011 rosyjska rakieta nośna Sojuz wystartowała o 04:14:03 UTC (o godz. 5:14:03 czasu polskiego) z zaśnieżonego kosmodromu Bajkonur w Kazachstanie. Start Sojuza rozpoczyna misję statku kosmicznego Sojuz TMA-22. Na pokładzie statku znajdują się członkowie Ekspedycji 23 na Międzynarodową Stację Kosmiczną (ISS)

Na pokładzie Sojuza TMA-22 poleciało trzech kosmonautów: Rosjanie Anton Szkaplerow i Anatolij Iwaniszyn oraz Amerykanin Daniel Burbank.

Na środę zaplanowane jest połączenie ze stacją kosmiczną ISS. Na stacji obecnie przebywają 3 osoby; są to członkowie załogi Sojuza TMA-02M: Rosjanin Siergiej Wołkow, Japończyk Satoshi Furukawa i Amerykanin Michael Fossum. Ich powrót na Ziemię zaplanowany jest na 22 listopada.

Po wycofaniu z użycia amerykańskich promów kosmicznych latem tego roku astronauci mogą dostać się na ISS jedynie w rosyjskich rakietach nośnych i statkach załogowych Sojuz lub chińskich Shenzhou (więcej patrz: Szef NASA złoży wizytę w Chinach).


К МКС отправился Союз ТМА-01М

В пятницу утром по местному времени с российского космодрома на территории Казахстана стартовал российский космический корабль «Союз ТМА-М», который доставит на Международную космическую станцию американского астронавта и двух российских космонавтов.

После двух дней полета в космическом корабле «Союз» американец Скотт Келли и россияне Александр Калери и Олег Скрипочка присоединятся к трем членам экипажа орбитальной станции.

По сообщениям американского аэрокосмического агентства НАСА, старт произведен в запланированное время, в пятницу в 7:10 утра по местному времени.

Менее чем через 10 минут после запуска космический корабль вышел на орбиту, развернул свои антенны и солнечные батареи.

После прибытия на МКС в субботу три члена экипажа «Союза» начнут свою пятимесячную вахту на орбитальной лаборатории.

8 октября 2010 года


Researcher discovers 39 new cockroach species, increasing genus Arenivaga fivefold

Heidi Hopkins, a taxonomic researcher and PhD candidate at the Museum of Southwestern Biology of the University of New Mexico, in Albuquerque, New Mexico, United States, conducted a four-year study revising the Arenivaga genus of cockroaches, discovering 39 new species in the genus previously thought to contain 9 species. ZooKeys journal published her findings Wednesday.

The study involved examining over 5200 specimens from universities and collections throughout the United States. The researcher had to dissect the specimens' genitalia to accurately distinguish the species as their external features were often not enough for identification. Hopkins was advised by Dr Kelly Miller during the investigation.

The species are also sexually dimorphic, making morphological association of females with males a challenge. The researcher published a key for adult males in the genus.

The study revealed a vaster distribution area than was previously thought, including additional regions in Southern US and over a half of Mexico.

Hopkins remarked about potential of further studies of the genus and Corydiidae, its parent family, "The extent of the radiation of this genus is quite surprising. These animals have remarkable adaptations that allow them to succeed in some of the harshest places on earth. I suspect that the thorough application of modern collection methods would reveal many more species of Arenivaga across Mexico, and many more species of Corydiidae in the deserts and dry places of the rest of the world."

The study was a first revisit of the genus since 1920 with only one new species discovered since then. The study was supported by grants from American Museum of Natural History, Academy of Natural Sciences of Drexel University, National Museum of Natural History, and University of New Mexico.


Мексиканские исследователи случайно открыли 39 новых видов тараканов

В результате четырёхлетней работы группа исследователей под руководством Хайди Хопкинса, аспиранта Университета Нью-Мексико (англ. University of New Mexico), случайно открыла 39 новых видов тараканов рода Arenivaga, в котором ранее были известны только 9 видов. Журнал ZooKeys опубликовал исследование, проведённое 23 февраля.

С предыдущего исследования рода, проведённого в 1920-ых годах, прошло почти столетие, и исследователи хотели просто уточнить описание вида по существующим образцам. Однако исследование выросло в обработку более 52000 образцов из коллекций в Мексике и США. Для отличия видов друг от друга пришлось разбирать половые органы насекомых, внешне неотличимых. В структуре и форме половых органов были обнаружены существенные отличия, что привело к открытию новых видов.

Для представителей рода характерен половой диморфизм — самки внешне сильно отличаются от самцов — и трудно установить соответствие между самками и самцами вида. Исследователи составили ключ-определитель только по самцам.

Хопкинс заметил, что семейство Corydiidae, к которому принадлежит род, также слабо изучено. Он сказал, что вид довольно широко распространён, но при этом обитает в суровой среде, и указал на потенциал исследования видов в пустынях мира с применением современных технологий.

28 февраля 2014 года


Romanian Ministry of Communications and IT discusses future objectives

The Romanian Ministry of Communications and Information Technology has discussed its objectives for the future in a seminar about informational services development. Romanian Prime Minister Călin Popescu-Tăriceanu, as well as the Minister of Communications and Information Technology, Zsolt Nagy, presented the government's major targets for the expansion and development of information services.

These include the sale of the government's remaining shares in telecommunication corporations Romtelecom and Postelecom, the relaunching of mobile phone operator Cosmorom and the maintaining of tax breaks for programmers. Another important objective was the awarding of more 3G licenses to mobile phone operators and more comprehensive online tax payment services. Connex, Romania's second largest mobile phone operator, launched a comprehensive 3G service this month, and more companies are expected to follow in the future.


Ministrul român al Comunicaţiilor şi IT discută obiective de viitor

19 aprilie 2005 București, România — Ministrul român al Comunicațiilor și IT și-a dezbătut obiectivele de viitor într-un seminar despre dezvoltarea serviciilor informaționale. Primul ministru, Călin Popescu Tăriceanu precum și ministrul comunicațiilor și tehnologiei informației, Zsolt Nagy a prezentat obiectivele principale ale Guvernului pentru expansiune și dezvoltare a serviciilor informatice.

Aceasta include vânzarea părților rămase în proprietatea Guvernului în companiile de telecomunicații Romtelecom și Postelecom și relansarea operatorului de telefonie mobilă Cosmorom precum și menținerea scutirii de taxe pentru programatori. Un alt obiectiv important este acordarea licenței 3G operatorilor de telefonie mobilă și mult mai bune servicii online de plată a taxelor.


Rosetta spacecraft passes Lutetia asteroid

The unmanned Rosetta spacecraft made its closest approach to the Lutetia asteroid Saturday.  Rosetta flew within 3,162 kilometers of the asteroid.  The spacecraft took high-resolution photos and searched for traces of an atmosphere and magnetic effects.  It also studied the composition and mass of the asteroid.

"As Rosetta drew close, a giant bowl-shaped depression stretching across much of the asteroid rotated into view," said Holger Sierks of the Max Planck Institute, "The images confirm that Lutetia is an elongated body, with its longest side around 130 kilometers. I think this is a very old object. Tonight we have seen a remnant of the Solar System's creation." Around 400 photographs were taken during the flyby; however, it will take several days for in-depth data to be transferred to Earth.

"Little is known about asteroid Lutetia other than it is about 100 kilometers (62 miles) wide," says American project scientist Claudia Alexander, "Allowing Rosetta's suite of science instruments to focus on this target of opportunity should greatly expand our knowledge of this huge space rock, while at the same time giving the mission's scientific instruments a real out-of-this-world workout."

The Lutetia asteroid is the largest asteroid yet visited by a spacecraft. Throughout its 4.5 billion year lifespan, its surface has been bombarded repeatedly by other space debris. Very little is known about the asteroid and scientists hope that this flyby will help determine the asteroid's origin. They hope to make their findings public at the Europlanet conference in Rome, Italy, late this September.

The Rosetta spacecraft, a project led by the European Space Agency, flew by the asteroid on its way to the Churyumov-Gerasimenko comet. Launched in 2004, the spacecraft is expected to arrive at its final destination in 2014. Once there, it will deploy the Philae lander to explore the comet's surface. The spacecraft's visit to this asteroid marks the final major scientific milestone before it is put into hibernation mode to be reactivated in 2011.


Sonda Rosetta zbliży się do asteroidy Lutetia

Rosetta i Philae zbadają asteroid Lutetia  10 lipca dojdzie do zbliżenia sondy Rosetta do asteroidy 21 Lutetia – największej asteroidy wokół której kiedykolwiek przeleciała sonda kosmiczna. Lutetia zostanie zbadana przez przyrządy sondy i lądownika Philae znajdującego się na jej pokładzie. Oba statki są w drodze do głównego celu misji, komety 67P/Czuriumow-Gierasimienko.

Zespoły kierujące sondą Rosetta, należącą do Europejskiej Agencji Kosmicznej, od miesiąca przygotowują statek na to zbliżenie. Najmniejsza odległość między obiektami wyniesie około 3200 km. Ponieważ nie wiadomo jak dokładnie wygląda asteroida, ESA żartobliwie nazywa spotkanie „randką w ciemno”, tym bardziej, że będzie ono miało miejsce w sobotni wieczór.

Od końca maja kontrolerzy prowadzą obserwacje Lutetii w celach nawigacyjnych. Pomiary z 6 lipca wskazują, że zbliżenie zajdzie na odległość 3162 km o godz. 17:44:56 CEST. Pozwoli to na około 2 godziny badań i fotografowania asteroidy. Dane powinny być przesyłane od razu, więc tego samego wieczoru powinny zostać opublikowane pierwsze zdjęcia.

Rosetta zbliżyła się już do jednej asteroidy. W 2008 minęła asteroidę Šteins. Niemal każdy napotkany przez sondy kosmiczne obiekt tego typu jest szczególny – podobnie będzie z Lutetią. Teleskopy naziemne wykonały jedynie poglądowe zdjęcia asteroidy. Dzięki przelotowi Rosetty poznamy dokładny wygląd Lutetii. Jej wymiary szacuje się na 95-134 kilometry, co czynią ją jednym z większych ciał pasa asteroid, leżącego między orbitami Marsa a Jowisza. Badania przeprowadzone przez sondę powinny dać wgląd również w budowę wewnętrzną i skład asteroidy.

Naukowcy podejrzewają, że duże rozmiary asteroid świadczą o jej zaawansowanym wieku. Ponieważ przetrwała do naszych czasów, może to oznaczać, że pamięta początku formowania się planet. Wiele danych wskazuje, że Lutetia jest asteroidą typu C, czyli składającą się z prostych związków węgla. Inne zaś sugerują, że należy do typu M, czyli zawierającego związki metali. Typ M oznaczałby, że Lutetia była w przeszłości fragmentem rdzenia innej, większej asteroidy. Kierownik naukowy misji Rosetta, Rita Schulz, liczy się również z możliwością, że istniejący podział asteroid na klasy może być błędny. Badania 21 Lutetii przez zespół Rosetta-Philae mogą się okazać w tym wypadku kluczowe.
Od 36. godziny przed zbliżeniem sonda będzie pozostawać w niemal stałym kontakcie z Ziemią, z przerwami koniecznymi na przełączenie łączności z jednej stacji naziemnej na drugą, co jest konieczne z uwagi na obrót Ziemi dookoła własnej osi. Stała łączność jest wymagana choćby dlatego, że położenie i kształt asteroidy jest znany tylko zgrubnie, co może wymagać poprawek w kursie i położeniu Rosetty.

Na potrzeby badań asteroidy o 08:45 CEST 10 lipca włączony zostanie lądownik Philae, skonstruowany przez DLR, niemiecką agencję kosmiczną. Lądownik został już raz włączony 6 lipca (między 12:45 a 15:05 CEST), aby przygotować go do zdań zaplanowanych na zbliżenie. Przelot koło asteroidy spowoduje, że lądownik będzie wystawiony na działanie promieni słonecznych, co wymaga przełączenia go w specjalny program utrzymania właściwej temperatury. Philae będzie badał Lutetię trzema przyrządami naukowymi:

Trudność zbadania Lutetii przez Rosettę i Philae, mimo znacznej odległości 3000 km, jest przyrównywany przez ESA do próby sfotografowania nieruchomego celu znajdującego się po przeciwnym pasie autostrady za pomocą aparatu umieszczonego na zdalnie sterowanym samochodziku jadącym z prędkością 100 km/h. Dodatkowo, operacja jest zaplanowana z miesięcznym wyprzedzeniem, a „samochodzik” znajduje się dwa razy dalej od Ziemi niż Księżyc. W rzeczywistości sonda minie Lutetię z prędkością ok. 15 km/s, czyli 54 000 km/h.

Rosetta i Philae są obecnie w ponad 2/3 drogi do swojego ostatecznego celu, jakim jest kometa 67P/Czuriumow-Gierasimienko. Wystrzelono je w roku 2004 a do tej pory przeleciały ponad 5 miliardów kilometrów. Philae ma wylądować na powierzchni komety i badać ją w sposób bezpośredni, co będzie pierwszą taką operacją w historii.

Zbliżenie można śledzić na specjalnym blogu prowadzonym przez kontrolerów sondy. DLR będzie opisywała zbliżenie niezależnie na stronie internetowej i Twitterze.