Thank you.
Since default Qubes relies heavily on Linux, it might be helpful if mods/team members created a thread detailing what is considered Qubes-specific and Linux-specific (maybe even pinned). Even as a long-time user, the line between the two seem blurry at times.
Basically, any code that the Qubes team writes is Qubes-specific, and any code written by a different entity is not. So, for example, most of Xen, the Linux kernel, Fedora, Debian, and Xfce were not written by the Qubes team. Rather, they were written by their respective teams, communities, and creators. In general, every entity is mainly responsible for its own code.
However, what mainly matters from a user’s perspective – and this is unman’s point – is that you can find answers for non-Qubes-specific things from non-Qubes sources. For example, Xfce is used in a great many different distros. It’s also used in Qubes. This means that you can find many Xfce solutions in non-Qubes places, such as the Xfce documentation, other Linux or distro forums, etc. Same goes for everything else that isn’t specific to Qubes.
Further reading: https://www.qubes-os.org/faq/#why-dont-you-fix-upstream-bugs-that-affect-qubes-os
I think that would be unworkable tbh, exactly because the line is
blurry.
There are some things that are straightforward, and the Qubes element small:
How do I install libreoffice? The Qubes part here is do it in the template
There are some things that are all Qubes:
How do I move files between qubes?
How do I get rid of the prompt when copying files between qubes?
How do I install programs in dom0?
Then there’s the rest, where the Qubes element may (or may not) be large.
Lets’ take an example:
How do I get WiFi working with a Realtek 8852AE?
Here, you have to build and install drivers from source: complicated
enough, and needs kernel headers. The Qubes part here is quite large
because you will have to understand templates, load (and use) a native
kernel, or consider using a standalone.
See? In that last case you can find instructions for the build, but you
need Qubes knowledge to understand where to best build the modules,
how to use a native kernel, and so on.
The complexity of that is determined by the specific WiFi card. If it
were an AR5BHB116, it would be category 1.
In many cases I see people posting questions where the answer is
either RTFM or STFW. In many cases, the Qubes element is small.
Why is this? I think at least part of the answer is that there is a
perception that Qubes is complicated, and difficult, and so users (even
“Linux savvy IT_sec professionals”) start with that expectation, and
think finding a solution will be beyond them. (That, and laziness.)
In my experience, if users are trained not to think that Qubes is
hard, they don’t find it hard. It helps if they know their limits, and
have support they can call on.
Need I say, that this is my opinion, and I don’t speak for Qubes?
(And @fiftyfourthparallel, nothing here is aimed at you.)
Amen.
I would add: Qubes OS is somewhat unique in that it includes much more upstream software than most OSes. For example, Qubes basically includes everything that most Linux distros include plus several entire Linux distros. This drastically increases the amount of third-party software users encounter when using Qubes. Since many users are blissfully unaware that what they’re using is Distro X inside of Qubes, we end up getting a lot of questions that apply equally to baremetal Fedora, for example.
Unfortunately, a lot of people seem to enjoy saying that Qubes is hard, and some (e.g., the Qubes subreddit) even seem to take pride in it and actively discourage people who are new to Linux from using Qubes. (“Start with a different Linux distro first” is probably the most common reply to newbies over there.)
Basically, any code that the Qubes team writes is Qubes-specific, and any code written by a different entity is not.
I’ve been using Qubes for more than five years and I am often befuddled about what came from the Qubes team vs. linux vs. xen. I don’t think it’s realistic to expect ordinary users to have an encyclopedic knowledge of the history of who wrote what in the operating system.
And Qubes does bill itself as an “operating system,” so it’s natural people will come to these forums for any problem if they are not aware that it’s due to one of the many underlying layers.
This question, which I had myself today, is a classic example of a perfectly reasonable one. Qubes does alter typical OS behavior when it comes to security, and it’s reasonable to wonder if perhaps this extends to windows. It does, actually; the windows are, at the very least, systematically decorated with the name of the originating VM. Does Qubes also intervene in how Windows activate w/r/t focus? A reasonable question; when a window steals focus there are security implications. Recently I was entering my master password into 1password, a web dispvm window popped up, and I typed a good half the password into a Google search with an Enter at the end. I ended up on this thread to figure out how to stop this from happening.
The suggestion fiftyfourthparallel made, a cheat sheet of what Qubes does and where it’s boundaries are, is a GREAT one. Maybe I will work on it. I don’t think it’s ideal that the responses to his idea included, twice, the phrase Read the F****ing Manual (even if directed at a large subset of Qubes forum users in general and not at fifyfourth). Qubes interacts with the underlying OS and window managers and so forth in many ways which are hard to fully know. As evidenced by unman’s last reply.
I totally appreciate that Qubes is a volunteer project, and that us users should be very grateful that Qubes exists for free or at all, and that no one owes us any time, information, help, etc. But I do think fiftyfourth raised a great idea here and addressing it could go some small but important distance in addressing people “saying that Qubes is hard.” (As opposed to complaining they do not RTFM. Which I myself have tried to do, and honestly I still have questions like this one here.) I don’t expect anyone else to implement this idea and will, if at all possible, endeavor to do it myself. I just wanted to make a post here because I think the conversation went in a different direction that did not embrace what, again, I think was a really solid idea by fiftyfourt.
For me just “It isn’t Qubes specific” is already of a great help. Because everything else has much more resources with helpful answers.
@gust I am a little bit at a loss when I read posts like yours.
Let’s start with @fiftyfourthparallel’s idea. I think @unman explained why it’s not possible to make a straight-forward general list. What I think is possible and you (or someone else) could volunteer to maintain is a FAQ style wiki-post that collects hints as they are discussed here (e.g. focus management is part of XFCE). The trick here would be several users who want this to exist and give it attention on a regular basis.
Regarding the “RTFM” … how can you be in this community for 5+ years and not get what @unman and @adw talk about? I see this daily. People are asking questions, get answers and keep asking more and it becomes readily apparent that they haven’t touched a search engine even once during the entire thread. That’s what we (I am happy to include myself) mean when talking about “laziness”. Or maybe “learned helplessness” so users don’t even try to search because they think it’ll be so complicated they can’t possibly understand it.
When I read a “RTFM” or “STFW” directed at me it means I failed to either describe what I already tried / read and why that wasn’t enough to make me understand it or I feel ashamed because I didn’t do those things and wasted other peoples time.
I don’t understand what you’re saying. How is the answer RTFM if the answer is not only not written down in a “FM” somewhere, but according to you, it can’t be written down, even by someone (me) who said (in my post above) he thought it was a great idea and was planning to do it. (Or at least: “I don’t expect anyone else to implement this idea and will, if at all possible, endeavor to do it myself.”)
Your response is more of the hostility and swearing from adw and unman, which is predictable, but I don’t get the weird stop energy. I say (in so many words) “I’d like to write this down so there is a FM to R” and you emerge to scold “no that’s impossible, but do my wiki idea.” Why not let me try?
It’s definitely true that things have changed around here in five years. There are more users. I for one think that’s a good thing but clearly many of the other senior people here do not.
Anyway I will not be back to this thread. I don’t appreciate the hostility, the swearing, and the false idea that the original question asker here should have known in advance that this is not a qubes issue. I also don’t appreciate the example set by people who set a bad tone of hitting community members with the f word and condescension.
(Also, forget the project I said I was going to try to do above. If you, who are apparently part of the grumpy team here now, think it’s impossible, fine, I won’t try, doesn’t sound like it’s welcome anyway. Sheesh.)
I agree.
Wow. That’s … unfortunate.
Nifty nick and profile picture though.
OK, I’ll bite.
As always, I speak for myself here, not for Qubes.
Although @gust wont be back to this thread, I want to correct some
serious untruths, that may mislead other users.
gust says that they have been involved with Qubes for more than 5 years. I
doubt that in that time they have ever seen swearing from @adw.
I did a quick search, and in the past 5 years, the only uses of RTFM
I found in the user facing groups (qubes-users and Forum) were where
people used it of themselves: “Yes, I RTFM”, “Duh, I should RTFM”,
and the like. (I’m excepting here some uses aimed at Drew White on the
mailing list, but they, like him, were a special case.)
There is a code of conduct that specifically precludes swearing or
unpleasantness, and it is policed by the mods.
There "are* more users, and everyone thinks that’s a good thing. The
Qubes team have worked to make Qubes more available to new users, and to
make it easier to use.
Members of the forum, whether part of the team or not, give their time
to help new users as much as they can.
Sometimes it’s useful to point to the docs, but generally people go out
of their way to help new users by hand holding them through a solution.
There’s no evidence that any one thinks that more users is a bad thing.
I don’t understand the accusation of hostility - I don’t hear it. Nor do I
hear condescension. There was no swearing, or “hitting members with the f
word”. Why say there was? Why tell lies?
Let’s look at what actually happened in this thread. Is it true that
there any one proposed “the false idea that the original question
should have known in advance that this is not a qubes issue”?
@fiftyfourthparallel asked a question.
I replied. I have a stock reply saved - “Many problems that people have
in Qubes are actually not Qubes specific. This is one of those.”
When I use this I invariably provide the answer, and point out any Qubes
specific features.
That’s exactly what happened here.
The discussion them moved to whether it would be possible to delimit
Qubes specific from non-Qubes specific issues.
In the course of that discussion i did use RTFM -
In many cases I see people posting questions where the answer is
either RTFM or STFW. In **many** cases, the Qubes element is small.
That might be the answer, but as I’ve tried to make clear, that
isnt the answer that is given in the Forum or on the mailing list.
So much for gust’s remarks - they seem to me to be based on untruth.
Now some general comments.
It’s true that the number of Qubes users seems to have increased.
It’s equally true that the number of posts where the answer is
in the docs, or has already been provided on the Forum, is increasing.
I don’t know the reason for this - maybe it’s because a forum lends
itself to this, or perhaps users new to Linux aren’t used to digging for
themselves, or perhaps new users think that Qubes is some organisation
with deep pockets and well paid support staff, or something else. I don’t
know.
I do know that the core team is tiny, and the number of contributors
has not kept in step with the number of users.
You can see this in the Forum too.
Anyone is capable of contributing to Qubes - even if you cant write code
you can dig in by helping answer questions in the Forum, providing
guides, improving the docs, providing feedback.
Any one can contribute to the docs, whether the official or the
community docs. If something isnt clear, make it clear.
There’s another thing that gust said that was misleading. Let me make
it clear - you don’t need permission from anyone to dig in.
If you have an idea for a guide, or for something you think will be
helpful, or somewhere where the docs need help, you don’t need to get
permission. Just do it. If it’s wrong. it will be corrected. If it’s
worthwhile it will grow and be useful to others.
Any one can contribute. Not many do. In fact, I see a increasing
tendency to say that something needs to be done and the devs/mods should
do it.
Don’t be like that - do it for yourself.
I really try hard to see the best possible intentions in other posters.
However what you demonstrate here is a near malicious capability to misunderstand and misinterpret everything that was said by others, their intentions/tone, their record and be offended at something that wasn’t at any point directed at you (or the OP or any community member in particular) and then project all of those bad vibes at the people caring about this community the most. What on earth is the point? Just for “lolz”? I don’t get this attitude and I don’t want to tolerate it here.
You can call it “laziness” but it’s also by fare the most efficient way to get the correct answer.
You can ask google for the answer and spend hours looking for the solution, or you get can an expert to explain the solution to you and spend minutes. This isn’t a qubes problem, you see the same thing in most internet forums.
Without any negative feedback, it’s going to be the approach used to solve any problem, and it does lead to people asking “dumb” questions, but they do it because it works.
It really doesn’t work, or at least it doesn’t work well.
You could as well argue that you should not learn to read as long as
others will read to you. That’s far more efficient.
If you don’t learn for yourself, you throw yourself on the mercy of
other people. And, if someone puts you wrong, you wont be able to tell.
The same applies in computing generally, and certainly in Qubes. If an issue is
already dealt with in the docs it’s hugely inefficient for you to play
the simpleton and ask “dumb” questions - inefficient for you and for
others.
Since you have not learnt basic skills, you will find yourself confused
by relatively simple things in Qubes. You wont be able to tell the
difference between good advice and bad - and there’s plenty of the
latter available for free.
Someone built my house, and if there is something wrong with it I call someone to fix it, I’m fully dependent on someone with the technical skills to help me. It’s the same if my car breaks down, I wouldn’t have any idea how to fix it.
I work as an ERP IT consultant, I do ERP integration and customization, there are lots of business that depend on someone like me to help maintain their ERP system, even if the base knowledge to do so is freely available on stack overflow.
Some people are perfectly fine with being dependent on other people solving their problems, in the grand scale of things this might be the norm, not the exception.
On the internet, people do become overly dependent on others because there is no financial downside to asking for help. If you had to pay $100 to ask a question on the forum, people would probably be a lot more inclined to search google before asking the question.
I know. And this is why there are crooked builders and dodgy mechanics
preying on people who know no better.
I originally had a longer post but I deleted most of it. It said some
think like:
I’m not saying that people have to study Qubes and read the manual over
and over. I work with many people who don’t do that. They have learnt to
do what they need to do, and don’t (generally) try to overreach. (And
they have us, of course.) They just get on with using Qubes.
I’ve argued before that it isn’t necessary to have the right “mental
model” of Qubes. The emphasis on qubes and templates that comes from the
base install can be a distraction. Compare the base Xfce menu with a
custom KDE menu that groups by task rather than qube. Most users
shouldn’t have to worry about whether they have enough templates, or
how to configure their VPN, or where they should install this or that.
This is why different flavors, and simple deployment tools are important.
At the moment Qubes still has something of a hobbyist feel to it. And it
also appeals to people who think they need more security/privacy but
have no idea what that entails. An important lesson that many new users
have to learn is “Don’t fiddle with it - you’ll break it”. It’s not an
easy lesson to learn.
I don’t think that money is at the root of this. There’s also a cultural
side, which shouldn’t be under estimated. A sense of entitlement, and
“learned helplessness”, (thanks Sven), go hand in hand, and seem to be
quite common in the US.
It may be that Qubes will always be a somewhat arcane area, with well
paid consultants setting up and maintaining systems. I hope that isn’t
the case. Partly because getting security and privacy is hard, and
needs work.
Enough.
I never presume to speak for the Qubes team.When you can’t find a comma to add.
EXACTLY!
I don’t subcutaneously think of Qubes as a Hypervisor; I thought and still have the habit of thinking of it as an OS hence a lot of references don’t say Qubes they say QubesOS. Furthermore, some people need to realize that not everyone graduates from Linux distros and thus would have such general historical knowledge of what contributed codebase came from what. I been around for decades never a hard core user of anything, so I will tell yall right now I have never in my life paid attention to that at all other than when I get paranoid about what distro derives from where as its linage or what blobs maybe security risks be they closed or FLOSS. Outside of the security edge cases, I truly pay zero attention to that stuff. I mean I still don’t even know wth “Xfce” even is and do I really have to in order to use Qubes, IMHO I shouldn’t have to it should just work for whatever it is (I still don’t know what it is).
I feels very exclusive to expect such from users btw, making this Qubes Forum and by extension QubesOS rub off as if for IT security professionals or highly skilled OS programers etc. When in fact, if some of yall would just be less pretentious then QubesOS could catch on as there is and will be a growing small demographic of users who are not advanced yet need the security protection especially through the compartmentalization Qubes offers that is supposedly easier than compared to KVM (from what I hear). More so too since now some vendors offer Qubes as a preinstall to ship new build computers, making it even more accessible for both newbies and others with edge cases that lack access to obtaining the iso image for themselves at first unboxing.
I think the best example here would be to point to the open inclusion and willingness to welcome complete newbies at the Tails project. I think if some Qubes gurus would be less snobby, Qubes could be the security version of Tails and Tails could be the anonymity and “leave no trace” version or a privacy OS since Whonix seems more difficult and less newbie friendly even on its Whonix Forum than Tails.
What I mean by this is, everyone who wants to dump all responsibilities onto the users might could learn something from how Tails approaches these issues too. Granted there is more adoption and Tails had a running head start as it existed before Qubes, but what I am saying is Qubes if adopting the same Human Relations as Tails will then likely gain “market share” of user adoption much faster than KVM and other Hypervisors thus one day maybe becoming an industry leader possibly (though hopefully never selling out like Red Hat lol) but not if people keep assuming users have some specialized Linux and Unix knowledge shaming them for asking “none Qubes specific questions” as far as I am concerned as a user if I am using Qubes then it is Qubes. You can hate this stance all you want from a tech perspective citing BIOS, distros, and blobs etc, but from a regular user perspective all we see is Qubes because that is what we have installed on our bare metal machine (clearly we aren’t advanced enough to virtualize it and it’s recommended to have it on bare metal anyway due to I guess the security for the drivers I don’t know). Anyway, that is exactly how less technical and non-technical users will see it as well btw — and don’t make an excuse not to serve these types of users because if Tails can do it so can Qubes IMHO. Just as Tails has a use case for Journalists and Activists I think Qubes does too just from a security stance more so than an anonymity stance, but what would be useful is for collaboration in that Qubes can be the base and users can then have a Template running Whonix or Tails right? Why can’t this level of collaboration happen more often and keep in mind the entire spectrum of user base from experts programmers to mouse clicking creatives that just want a secure machine to do Graphic Design for a political campaign or for their business without risking security to do so?
(apparently corporate espionage and sabotage is a thing now even among small business owners and sole proprietorship entrepreneurs, as well as stealing Intellectual Property from even creative YouTubers let alone NFT projects and indie artists).
I would say, that is one area Qubes tech support community has a lot to grow in, there isn’t many video Guides out there like on YouTube about Qubes. Most of the Qubes videos I found were all about installing Qubes and setting up Templates and that’s most of them, hardly any go deeper. In fact there is sadly plenty of videos claiming how Qubes is too difficult and unsuitable for newbies, and I disagree it is just Qubes lacks accessible resources (no true blue newbie is going to read the online text based manual they will go to YouTube lol and videos there are still lacking). All while there are tons of deep video guides about Tails, and especially Ubuntu.
So until the web is more propagated with rich multimedia guides about Qubes and Qubes troubleshooting (therefore accommodating all learning styles), then I think it is extremely off putting and hostile to assume any user can just find the “non-related Qubes” answer from other sources always (this also expect us to know what words to search for let alone know how to use search engines at a more advanced input level btw many people just do basic searches). I for example after 2 days have yet to confirm if LUKS2 encrypted “reencrypt” will or will not risk overwriting the hard disk so at this point I will just make a guess that it does as no one will likely answer me in the time I am under pressure of, because sources like Red Hat have a warning but ironically the warning box is worded too vaguely. That is the other thing, yall expect people to understand vague technical statements let alone the jargon, totally not happening especially for users who have learning disabilities like myself.
Anyway, the point is I think from a user inclusivity perspective Qubes has tons of potential but not as long as higher skilled techies reply to regular users and/or newbies with “this is not Qubes specific” abrasive type of replies that make someone pause and wonder “am I about to be censored or kicked off this forum for being a newbie?” As that is how the attitude rubs off in feeling like, and for some it may make them feel more uneducated and helpless which hurts those types of users self esteem instead of embracing learning for those that have the luxury to take the time to learn it creates a clique like illusion that they aren’t included in unless they become a GRUB or BASH or whatever Guru expert themselves (*NOTE: some of us are under hostile conditions and don’t have those luxuries — e.g. taking the time to learn 1st — right away until Qubes or Whonix or Tails saves us btw; so later maybe the learning will happen when not under threat anymore). Kind of similar, though less hostile than a certain firewall Forum I was on where instantly greeted with “oh you only came here because you were hacked” from a place that literally sells for profit a firewall solution, of course because that is what their product is supposedly solving yet some there greeted me on my first post there as if to shame me for looking for a firewall solution to prevent being hacked again. I mean really how do they sell a product with that attitude, oh I know because most of their customers are enterprise even though they are in a niche hobby market too pshhh. See my point here though, not exactly brand building effort going on to say the least with those Firewall people on that Forum.
As a brand new user who rushed into QubesOS for safety, I lack the current luxury to take time to learn so it feels frustrating for me as well btw because I am a fan of learning but not when you need something for necessities due to your Threat Model all of a sudden drastically changing overnight; given my situation with an advanced criminal Threat Actor specifically targeting me and my contacts including some of my family members.
BTW, speaking of cultural differences as well since @unman brought it up, his example is very limited and cynical in perspective and IMHO. I remember back in the day on other tech Forums people were “open” and highly collaborative, even some old BBS had open inclusivity so it isn’t just about entitlement or learned helplessness. It can also be about open collaboration and the whole mantra of “if you need help ask for it” and also “speak up”. For those who know more than another user there is “step up” and don’t forget where most of us started from as many were all n00bs at some time in our tech journey. I don’t get that vibe from most here only a few sadly, so yes it feels slightly hostile to certain cultural groups and especially newbies from said cultures, but I myself am sticking around because there are some I see who do share the same culture as me on this Forum so the rest can just be grumpy and ignore me if they will as apparently this place lacks a Block feature.
Oh and speaking of “searches” I found this thread because I was wondering what
“Activate focus stealing protection” was all about and found this thread mentioning it only to then see the discussion following claiming this shouldn’t be asked yet here I was a newbie searching YOUR Forum for these words so yes it is Qubes related and newbies like me will search here trying to find it just as I did
You can create a keyboard shortcut to toggle between new windows being focused or not:
#!/bin/bash
xfconf-query -c xfwm4 -p /general/focus_new -T
notify-send "Focus new window: $(xfconf-query -c xfwm4 -p /general/focus_new)"
Put this script somewhere in dom0 (like /home/user/myscript), make it executable (chmod u+x) and assign a shortcut to it under System settings → Keyboard → Application shortcuts.
For example this is useful, when you want to keep a password prompt focused and not accidentally switch to new window
That is so cool!!! Thank you so much
