hi,
sajolida wrote (03 Apr 2012 19:25:56 GMT) :
> I already pushed to the doc/experimental branch a first batch of
> docs for the upcoming release.
Great! I reviewed all these new pages, liked it very much, and have
a few minor fixes I should push.
General note: it seems like these new pieces of documentation contain
many links to numbered sections or sub-sections in other pages, such
as "startup_options#index2h1". This seems very fragile to me: I doubt
many of us will think of grep'ing through the wiki to adapt such links
after doing a change that shifts section numbers. IIRC there's an
ikiwiki plugin (maybe in contrib/? maybe written by pabs?) that allows
to give section headings *named* anchors, in a way that I don't
precisely remember, but that might help solve this problem.
> - doc/first_steps/usb_installer
> This does only document the "Clone & Install" option so far.
> How important do you think it is to document the other options in
> time for Tails 0.11?
I think the upgrade options can be postponed to right before 0.11.1.
But we don't know how far from 0.11 this time will be,
so I suggest writing these bits before it's a real emergency.
> - doc/first_steps/startup_options
The screenshot does not display the widgets that allow the user to
choose their preferred language and keyboard layout.
Is this intentional?
> - doc/first_steps/startup_options/administration_password
I'm not convinced by "to start Tails" in "Then click on the Login
button to start Tails". I've seen a more accurate reference to the
GNOME Desktop in some other new page, so I guess we can allow
ourselves to write something less wrong here too :)
> - doc/first_steps/persistence/warnings
When I read this:
Remember also that secure deletion do not work as expected on USB
sticks. See the corresponding documentation. Read how to delete the
persistent storage instead.
I think this suggests the "delete the persistent storage" page deals
with secure deletion of that storage area. However, the first set of
instructions given on that other page "choose Applications ▸ Tails
▸ Delete persistent storage, and click on the Delete button." does not
support secure deletion yet, and the other sets of instructions either
let me totally doubtful, or just don't work. See other problems in
this area later on.
About "The programs included in Tails are [...] audited for their
security. This may not be the case of all the packages available in
Debian": the way the "security" word is used here results in
a sentence that is largely overstating what we are really doing.
And follows "Other programs than the ones included in Tails may be
subject to security holes that Tails do not protect you from", which
is oversimplifying as well IMHO. Maybe go beyond the binary "security"
flawed concept and explain that:
* Even "secure" software may be unsuitable to use in an anonymity
context (e.g. leaks IP address).
* Tails is an integrated system and injecting random stuff into the
mix may make the end result behave in totally unpredictable ways
that may, or may not, match the expectations one puts into Tails
* Installing additional packages is likely to turn your customized
Tails into something Tails developers cannot, or don't want to,
support.
Is "permanent storage" used on purpose?
"Only the files that you specify are stored." --> I'd rather say "the
files and folders".
> - doc/first_steps/persistence/configure
"and open the Permanent folder" --> maybe you want us to change this,
but currently, it's called "Persistent". The rest of this paragraph
gets it right.
"Note that those packages are not automatically reinstalled when
starting a new Tails working session." --> I suggest stating why one
may want to activate this feature, in addition to its limits. Same for
the next (APT Lists) feature.
> - doc/first_steps/persistence/use
Looks like "the Permanent folder" strikes back.
> - doc/first_steps/persistence/delete
"Creating a new persistent storage on top of an old one makes it hard
for an attacker to recover the files of the old persistent storage
using data recovery techniques" --> Why? Because you suppose the old
LUKS header to be overwritten by a newer one? If this is the only
reason, I don't think we can seriously base anything on this. E.g.
the modern partitioning tools we're using (namely: udisks) try to be
clever wrt. sector alignment, and e.g. I would not bet Wheezy's udisks
(in Tails 2.0), will create a new persistent storage exactly at the
same place as Squeeze's udisks (in Tails 0.11) did.
1. Erase Tails
2. Securely clean all the available disk space
--> I think #2 only works if there's a filesystem on the target USB
stick, which is not true after following #1.
> While writing the doc on the persistent storage I also felt the need
> to maybe work in better collaboration with the people writing the
> GUI. It would be good to make more consistent the terminology and
> style between our custom GUI and our documentation.
Sure. Feel free to suggest whatever improvement you can think of.
I did not know one may use the "storage" word as if it can be counted,
as in "create a persistent storage". I thought a "storage volume",
"storage area" or "storage container" can be counted, but *some*
storage cannot. Did you double-check the (more concise) way you are
using it is correct? If it is, I'm happy to adapt the GUI accordingly.
> But I'm not sure whether the timeline still also us to do so now
> that we passed the deep freeze.
>From the release process side, I think improvements in terminology and
style consistency can still be pushed into the various new GUI.
Great work!
Cheers,
--
intrigeri
| GnuPG key @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/intrigeri.asc
| OTR fingerprint @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/otr.asc
