<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
	<channel>
		<atom:link href="https://dev1galaxy.org/extern.php?action=feed&amp;tid=3578&amp;type=rss" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
		<title><![CDATA[Dev1 Galaxy Forum / Apparmor (support) is a complete joke]]></title>
		<link>https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?id=3578</link>
		<description><![CDATA[The most recent posts in Apparmor (support) is a complete joke.]]></description>
		<lastBuildDate>Mon, 04 Jan 2021 13:12:20 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<generator>FluxBB</generator>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Re: Apparmor (support) is a complete joke]]></title>
			<link>https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=26549#p26549</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<p>just an fyi, i would treat apparmor on a case by case basis. When im not using openbsd i use firejail profiles. </p><p>As this person says in below link, most profiles are ubuntu based. </p><p><a href="https://github.com/cryptofuture/apparmor-profiles" rel="nofollow">https://github.com/cryptofuture/apparmor-profiles</a></p><p>and ive read one should maybe only use firejail or apparmor, not both together.</p>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[dummy@example.com (dice)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Mon, 04 Jan 2021 13:12:20 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=26549#p26549</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Re: Apparmor (support) is a complete joke]]></title>
			<link>https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=26547#p26547</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<p>I&#039;m more furious to have apparmor bloatware enabled by default. <br />First thing I did, stopped the service and apt purge that thing out of my laptop.</p><p>Is a laptop, not a server. </p><p>Having it enabled by default is IMHO a very stupid choice.</p>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[dummy@example.com (asbesto)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Mon, 04 Jan 2021 09:46:50 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=26547#p26547</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Re: Apparmor (support) is a complete joke]]></title>
			<link>https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=22579#p22579</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<p>Just to add, there are quite a large number of additional profiles that come in the apparmor-profiles package that aren&#039;t installed by default. They are put in /usr/share/apparmor/extra-profiles instead. These include basic stuff like postfix, evolution and firefox profiles. However they do warn you that they may not work as intended, and need to be tested in complain mode against your particular installation, and perhaps modified. So I would have to agree that apparmor as currently available, if not a joke, is still quite immature.</p><p>Update: Having looked at some of these extra-profiles, they do seem very out of date:&#160; e.g. in the firefox profile I see references to the latest version - Firefox 4 b8 (2010-11); the location of the evolution files changed long ago from that in the profiles (local evolution moved from ~./evolution to ~./local/share/evolution); most of the last modified dates in the other profiles are no later than 2005-2014. Clearly they have not been maintained.</p>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[dummy@example.com (Marjorie)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Thu, 11 Jun 2020 22:32:15 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=22579#p22579</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Re: Apparmor (support) is a complete joke]]></title>
			<link>https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=22569#p22569</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<p>Apparmor profiles are only provided for processes that are recognized as potentially dangerous and Apparmor confinement is provided to make your computer safer.</p><p>If you do a default Beowulf install you get at default set of profiles that are known to work, or they may be provided with additional packages/programs you install. I&#039;ve installed LibreOffice from backports and the Firejail package, that is explicitly provided to create a jail for Firefox. These profiles are the one you see in my previous Apparmor status reports.</p><p>Profiles that are more experimental that are not guaranteed to work are provided set to complain mode so they don&#039;t break anything but you can still use/test them and see what apparmor complains about in the logs.</p><p>The Debian package <strong>apparmor-profiles</strong> provides various experimental Apparmor profiles. It says do not expect them to work out-of-the-box. The package description says &quot;These profiles are not mature enough to be shipped in enforce mode by default on Debian (and hence Devuan). They are shipped in complain mode so that users can test them, choose which are desired, and help improve them upstream if needed&quot;. Some even more experimental profiles are included in <strong>apparmor-profiles-extras</strong>.</p><p>Having now installed these optional profile packages the number applied in enforce or complain does not change because they are not being used. Some relate to programs I don&#039;t use on my PC (e.g pidgin), some are simply not being used at the moment (e.g. ping, avahi-daemon).</p><p>Not every program/process has an Apparmor profile. There is one for Thunderbird (as i don&#039;t use this I&#039;ve moved it to /etc/apparmor.d/disable) but there isn&#039;t (to my knowledge) one for Evolution, a program I do use and is running at the moment. Also some programs (such as ping) may only run momentarily so you won&#039;t be able to see it enforced/complaining in a status report without opening a second xterm and timing it right.</p><p>Here&#039;s my apparmor status report with the two experimental profile packages installed:</p><div class="codebox"><pre class="vscroll"><code>$ sudo service apparmor status
[sudo] password for marjorie: 
apparmor module is loaded.
46 profiles are loaded.
28 profiles are in enforce mode.
   /usr/bin/evince
   /usr/bin/evince-previewer
   /usr/bin/evince-previewer//sanitized_helper
   /usr/bin/evince-thumbnailer
   /usr/bin/evince//sanitized_helper
   /usr/bin/man
   /usr/bin/pidgin
   /usr/bin/pidgin//sanitized_helper
   /usr/bin/totem
   /usr/bin/totem-audio-preview
   /usr/bin/totem-video-thumbnailer
   /usr/bin/totem//sanitized_helper
   /usr/lib/cups/backend/cups-pdf
   /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/lightdm/lightdm-guest-session
   /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/lightdm/lightdm-guest-session//chromium
   /usr/sbin/apt-cacher-ng
   /usr/sbin/cups-browsed
   /usr/sbin/cupsd
   /usr/sbin/cupsd//third_party
   /usr/sbin/tcpdump
   firejail-default
   libreoffice-senddoc
   libreoffice-soffice//gpg
   libreoffice-xpdfimport
   man_filter
   man_groff
   nvidia_modprobe
   nvidia_modprobe//kmod
18 profiles are in complain mode.
   /usr/bin/irssi
   /usr/sbin/dnsmasq
   /usr/sbin/dnsmasq//libvirt_leaseshelper
   avahi-daemon
   identd
   klogd
   libreoffice-oopslash
   libreoffice-soffice
   mdnsd
   nmbd
   nscd
   ping
   smbd
   smbldap-useradd
   smbldap-useradd///etc/init.d/nscd
   syslog-ng
   syslogd
   traceroute
5 processes have profiles defined.
5 processes are in enforce mode.
   /usr/sbin/cups-browsed (2141) 
   /usr/sbin/cupsd (2109) 
   /usr/lib/cups/notifier/dbus (2110) /usr/sbin/cupsd
   /usr/lib/cups/notifier/dbus (2111) /usr/sbin/cupsd
   /usr/lib/cups/notifier/dbus (3262) /usr/sbin/cupsd
0 processes are in complain mode.
0 processes are unconfined but have a profile defined.</code></pre></div>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[dummy@example.com (Marjorie)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Thu, 11 Jun 2020 13:57:55 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=22569#p22569</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Re: Apparmor (support) is a complete joke]]></title>
			<link>https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=22568#p22568</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<div class="quotebox"><cite>Marjorie wrote:</cite><blockquote><div><p>I think you haven&#039;t understood that profiles are only activated (&#039;<strong>defined</strong>&#039;) for running processes.</p></div></blockquote></div><p>I have understood it perfectly. A running basic install typically has over 20 processes in addition to the kernel threads. The fact that only 3 of them are confined is worrying.</p><p>Why is LO in complain and not enforce?</p>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[dummy@example.com (specing)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Thu, 11 Jun 2020 11:33:59 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=22568#p22568</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Re: Apparmor (support) is a complete joke]]></title>
			<link>https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=22565#p22565</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<p>I think you haven&#039;t understood that profiles are only activated (&#039;<strong>defined</strong>&#039;) for running processes. </p><p>If I start up Document Viewer (evince) as process /usr/bin/evince with PID 5440 then apparmor <strong>defines</strong> another process and in this case puts it in <strong>enforce</strong> mode. Only running programs that have profiles have defined/enforced/complain processes which are then shown with their PID. </p><p>Compare this status result with my previous one:</p><div class="codebox"><pre class="vscroll"><code>$ sudo service apparmor status
apparmor module is loaded.
23 profiles are loaded.
21 profiles are in enforce mode.
   /usr/bin/evince
   /usr/bin/evince-previewer
   /usr/bin/evince-previewer//sanitized_helper
   /usr/bin/evince-thumbnailer
   /usr/bin/evince//sanitized_helper
   /usr/bin/man
   /usr/lib/cups/backend/cups-pdf
   /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/lightdm/lightdm-guest-session
   /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/lightdm/lightdm-guest-session//chromium
   /usr/sbin/cups-browsed
   /usr/sbin/cupsd
   /usr/sbin/cupsd//third_party
   /usr/sbin/tcpdump
   firejail-default
   libreoffice-senddoc
   libreoffice-soffice//gpg
   libreoffice-xpdfimport
   man_filter
   man_groff
   nvidia_modprobe
   nvidia_modprobe//kmod
2 profiles are in complain mode.
   libreoffice-oopslash
   libreoffice-soffice
5 processes have profiles defined.
5 processes are in enforce mode.
   /usr/bin/evince (5440) 
   /usr/sbin/cups-browsed (2102) 
   /usr/sbin/cupsd (5368) 
   /usr/lib/cups/notifier/dbus (5371) /usr/sbin/cupsd
   /usr/lib/cups/notifier/dbus (5372) /usr/sbin/cupsd
0 processes are in complain mode.
0 processes are unconfined but have a profile defined.</code></pre></div><p>Note: I&#039;ve shutdown/restarted overnight which is why the PIDs have all changed. If I close Evince and open LibreOffice Calc I get:</p><div class="codebox"><pre><code>6 processes have profiles defined.
4 processes are in enforce mode.
   /usr/sbin/cups-browsed (2102) 
   /usr/sbin/cupsd (5368) 
   /usr/lib/cups/notifier/dbus (5371) /usr/sbin/cupsd
   /usr/lib/cups/notifier/dbus (5372) /usr/sbin/cupsd
2 processes are in complain mode.
   /usr/lib/libreoffice/program/oosplash (7583) libreoffice-oopslash
   /usr/lib/libreoffice/program/soffice.bin (7631) libreoffice-soffice
0 processes are unconfined but have a profile defined.</code></pre></div>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[dummy@example.com (Marjorie)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Thu, 11 Jun 2020 08:43:35 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=22565#p22565</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Re: Apparmor (support) is a complete joke]]></title>
			<link>https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=22564#p22564</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<p>That means only 3 processes are actually confined. That is not many.</p><p>I have to check what the situation is with Fedora/SELinux.</p>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[dummy@example.com (specing)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Wed, 10 Jun 2020 23:47:48 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=22564#p22564</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Re: Apparmor (support) is a complete joke]]></title>
			<link>https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=22563#p22563</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<p>Beowulf is now &#039;stable&#039;, and Ascii &#039;oldstable&#039; so you might well find that upgrading is a good idea.<br />Not sure what the effect of upgrading an only partially working apparmor will be on apparmor. I did a clean install and then restored my /home directory.</p><p>Anyway this is my status report in Beowulf. It <em>says</em> there are no processes unconfined that have a profile defined.</p><div class="codebox"><pre class="vscroll"><code>$ sudo service apparmor status
apparmor module is loaded.
23 profiles are loaded.
21 profiles are in enforce mode.
   /usr/bin/evince
   /usr/bin/evince-previewer
   /usr/bin/evince-previewer//sanitized_helper
   /usr/bin/evince-thumbnailer
   /usr/bin/evince//sanitized_helper
   /usr/bin/man
   /usr/lib/cups/backend/cups-pdf
   /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/lightdm/lightdm-guest-session
   /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/lightdm/lightdm-guest-session//chromium
   /usr/sbin/cups-browsed
   /usr/sbin/cupsd
   /usr/sbin/cupsd//third_party
   /usr/sbin/tcpdump
   firejail-default
   libreoffice-senddoc
   libreoffice-soffice//gpg
   libreoffice-xpdfimport
   man_filter
   man_groff
   nvidia_modprobe
   nvidia_modprobe//kmod
2 profiles are in complain mode.
   libreoffice-oopslash
   libreoffice-soffice
3 processes have profiles defined.
3 processes are in enforce mode.
   /usr/sbin/cups-browsed (2095) 
   /usr/sbin/cupsd (2065) 
   /usr/lib/cups/notifier/dbus (3187) /usr/sbin/cupsd
0 processes are in complain mode.
0 processes are unconfined but have a profile defined.</code></pre></div>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[dummy@example.com (Marjorie)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Wed, 10 Jun 2020 23:05:44 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=22563#p22563</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Re: Apparmor (support) is a complete joke]]></title>
			<link>https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=22562#p22562</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<div class="quotebox"><cite>Marjorie wrote:</cite><blockquote><div><p>I never bothered with apparmor in Ascii but it &#039;works out of the box&#039; in Beowulf (well almost I had to add a a line to/etc/apparmor/ usr.sbin.cupsd for /etc/dnscrypt-proxy/resolv.conf when I symlinked /etc/resolv.conf to it as then started to complain).</p><p>However I can confirm that in Beowulf /etc/rcS.d/S12apparmor <em>does</em> start before /etc/rcS.d/S13networking as one can can see by looking at /var/log/boot. I doubt if moving it any earlier (before file systems are mounted) would help.</p></div></blockquote></div><p>Upgrading to beowulf will be the best, then. Are there any unconfined processes left?</p>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[dummy@example.com (specing)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Wed, 10 Jun 2020 22:32:32 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=22562#p22562</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Re: Apparmor (support) is a complete joke]]></title>
			<link>https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=22558#p22558</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<p>I never bothered with apparmor in Ascii but it &#039;works out of the box&#039; in Beowulf (well almost I had to add a a line to/etc/apparmor/ usr.sbin.cupsd for /etc/dnscrypt-proxy/resolv.conf when I symlinked /etc/resolv.conf to it as then started to complain).</p><p>However I can confirm that in Beowulf /etc/rcS.d/S12apparmor <em>does</em> start before /etc/rcS.d/S13networking as one can can see by looking at /var/log/boot. I doubt if moving it any earlier (before file systems are mounted) would help.</p>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[dummy@example.com (Marjorie)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Wed, 10 Jun 2020 21:12:06 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=22558#p22558</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Re: Apparmor (support) is a complete joke]]></title>
			<link>https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=22552#p22552</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<p>I think this is due to networking being ahead of apparmor in the boot order:</p><div class="codebox"><pre><code>TARGETS = mountkernfs.sh eudev keyboard-setup.sh mountdevsubfs.sh brltty bootlogd urandom mountall.sh mountall-bootclean.sh hwclock.sh mountnfs.sh mountnfs-bootclean.sh alsa-utils networking checkroot.sh hostname.sh procps checkfs.sh checkroot-bootclean.sh bootmisc.sh kmod espeakup screen-cleanup x11-common stop-bootlogd-single apparmor</code></pre></div><p>How do I make apparmor start first? Apparently that init script is responsible for loading profiles into the kernel and must run before anything else.<br /> I have tried moving S12apparmor symlink to S00apparmor in /etc/rcS.d/ to no avail.</p>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[dummy@example.com (specing)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Wed, 10 Jun 2020 13:45:40 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=22552#p22552</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Re: Apparmor (support) is a complete joke]]></title>
			<link>https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=22523#p22523</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<p>I&#039;ve now changed the profile definition line from</p><div class="codebox"><pre><code>profile dhclient /{usr/,}sbin/dhclient</code></pre></div><p>to</p><div class="codebox"><pre><code>profile /sbin/dhclient</code></pre></div><p>Which results in progress:</p><div class="codebox"><pre><code>0 profiles are in complain mode.
2 processes have profiles defined.
1 processes are in enforce mode.
   /usr/sbin/nscd (1899) 
0 processes are in complain mode.
1 processes are unconfined but have a profile defined.
   /sbin/dhclient (880) </code></pre></div>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[dummy@example.com (specing)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Tue, 09 Jun 2020 11:29:53 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=22523#p22523</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Re: Apparmor (support) is a complete joke]]></title>
			<link>https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=22522#p22522</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<div class="quotebox"><cite>Altoid wrote:</cite><blockquote><div><p>Glad you managed to get it to work.</p><p>See?<br />Wasn&#039;t <em>that</em> hard.<br />Lack of designed maintainer and all.</p><p>Cheers,</p><p>A.</p></div></blockquote></div><p>&quot;work&quot; is too strong of a word given the state of AppArmor on this test VM.</p><p>Every package I install, every README and man-page I read, every command I execute and ultimately, every post I add to this thread is a further nail to AppArmor-on-Devuan&#039;s coffin.</p><p>/usr/share/doc/apparmor-profiles/extras/README contains example commands of which: 2/7 do not exist, 4/7 use invocations of aa-enforce/aa-complain that are not documented in their man pages (but actually do something) and the remaining one is useless to me.</p><p>I have dhclient running, and there is a dhclient profile in /usr/share/doc/apparmor-profiles/extras/sbin.dhclient. So I followed instructions in the README by copying (which is bad from a maintenance perspective, not to mention that the profile should probably be part of the isc-whatever-dhclient package in the first place) that profile to /etc/apparmor.d. Then I ran </p><div class="codebox"><pre><code>aa-enforce /etc/apparmor.d/sbin.dhclient</code></pre></div><p>which resulted in</p><div class="codebox"><pre><code>Setting /etc/apparmor.d/sbin.dhclient to enforce mode.</code></pre></div><p>Yay, right? Nope: aa-status now says:</p><div class="codebox"><pre><code>44 profiles are in enforce mode.
   /usr/bin/irssi
   ...
   dhclient
   ..</code></pre></div><p>Notice how dhclient has no /sbin in front of it? The heck?</p><p>After n+1th reboot, dhclient is still not confined.</p><p>This is also funny:</p><div class="codebox"><pre><code># aa-enforce /sbin/dhclient 
Setting /sbin/dhclient to enforce mode.

ERROR: /etc/apparmor.d/sbin.dhclient contains no profile</code></pre></div><p>(Yes, I&#039;ve checked:&#160; /etc/apparmor.d/sbin.dhclient does define a profile)</p>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[dummy@example.com (specing)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Tue, 09 Jun 2020 11:21:11 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=22522#p22522</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Re: Apparmor (support) is a complete joke]]></title>
			<link>https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=22514#p22514</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<p>Hello:</p><div class="quotebox"><cite>specing wrote:</cite><blockquote><div><p>... both apparmor-utils and dh-apparmor.</p></div></blockquote></div><p>Right.</p><div class="quotebox"><cite>specing wrote:</cite><blockquote><div><p>... install NSCD and what do you know:</p></div></blockquote></div><p><span class="bbc">apparmor</span> started to work.</p><div class="quotebox"><cite>specing wrote:</cite><blockquote><div><div class="codebox"><pre><code>43 profiles are loaded.
43 profiles are in enforce mode.
...
0 profiles are in complain mode.
1 processes have profiles defined.
1 processes are in enforce mode.
   /usr/sbin/nscd (3725) 
0 processes are in complain mode.
0 processes are unconfined but have a profile defined.</code></pre></div></div></blockquote></div><div class="quotebox"><cite>specing wrote:</cite><blockquote><div><p>The &quot;0 processes are unconfined ...<br />... suggests that everything other than nscd does not have a profile at all.</p></div></blockquote></div><p>So the problem was not in <span class="bbc">apparmor</span> but in how you have to configure it.<br />Right?</p><p>Glad you managed to get it to work.</p><p>See?<br />Wasn&#039;t <em>that</em> hard.<br />Lack of designed maintainer and all.</p><p>Cheers,</p><p>A.</p>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[dummy@example.com (Altoid)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Mon, 08 Jun 2020 22:40:44 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=22514#p22514</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Re: Apparmor (support) is a complete joke]]></title>
			<link>https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=22510#p22510</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<p>I have both apparmor-utils and dh-apparmor.</p><p>What I just did was install NSCD and what do you know:</p><div class="codebox"><pre><code>43 profiles are loaded.
43 profiles are in enforce mode.
...
0 profiles are in complain mode.
1 processes have profiles defined.
1 processes are in enforce mode.
   /usr/sbin/nscd (3725) 
0 processes are in complain mode.
0 processes are unconfined but have a profile defined.</code></pre></div><p>I also just did dpkg-reconfigure apparmor.</p><p>The &quot;0 processes are unconfined but have a profile defined.&quot; line suggests that everything other than nscd does not have a profile at all. Which means I need to get more profiles somewhere.</p><p>And indeed, a short excursion into /etc/apparmor.d reveals that there aren&#039;t many profiles present.</p>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[dummy@example.com (specing)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Mon, 08 Jun 2020 21:47:57 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?pid=22510#p22510</guid>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
