9/11 in 2020

9/11 will always represent a pivotal moment in my life.

19 years ago, I decided to take a massive leap of faith and commit fully to the business that I still operate today. I gave notice at my job, and Monday, September 10th, 2001 became my first day as a full-time marketing consultant.

This isn’t going to be a “where were you on 9/11?” post. I did that on the 7th anniversary. Nor is it a reflection on the bizarre connection my local community has to the tragic events of that day… nor of the apparent FBI goof-up.

Instead, this is a brief meditation on how 9/11 feels in the most bizarre year of our lives.

2020 is the year that so much has crystallized for me. And possibly for others.

In 2020, more than ever, I find that I:

  • distrust government, media outlets, and tech platforms more than ever
  • detest the politicization of everything from wearing masks to treating human beings with dignity and respect (or not)
  • despise the binary view of beliefs which attempts to place everyone on either the “left” or the “right”
  • lament the loss of hopes and dreams on the part of so many—from fires and other calamities… from watching the fabric of our society fray before our eyes… or from witnessing the foundations of our economy quake
  • labor every day without the sense that I’m making a meaningful contribution any more.

In 2001, we were attacked by an enemy. I wept for the families of the 9/11 victims. I was heartbroken for New York City. And I was stricken with a sense of duty to protect the freedoms and values that I thought our nation represented.

In 2020, we are the enemy. We’ve lost our ability to listen and to speak. Our love for our fellow human beings seems to have vanished. Our system of government seems to be failing. Our institutions are untrustworthy.

The 9/11 attacks took place over the span of mere hours—a bright flash of terror that changed us forever.

The 2020 attacks have taken months—a gradual glow, not of terror, but of dismay.

How will we recover?

How to Convert a Word Document to Markdown Format

So you need to get your nifty Word doc into a format that can be used on the web, handled by a wide variety of editors, or — if you’re like me — included in a git repository.

The Problem: You Created Your Content in Microsoft Word

Isn’t that always a problem?

OK I’m not a Microsoft fan these days—almost across the board. Haven’t been for many years.

But not long ago I created a massive proposal for a client that we’re partnering with for some projects. Our client is a Microsoft shop through and through, and I’ve been forced to install Microsoft Teams on my Linux machine to collaborate with their crew. This has actually been a surprisingly good experience—allowing me to use Microsoft Word on Ubuntu. (Yes, this could have been done in the browser, but I find the desktop client for Teams to be quite good.)

But now we need to be able to repurpose and reuse much of the content in the proposal in future proposals, which will require a fair amount of editing, version control, change tracking, etc.

Sure. This could theoretically be done in Microsoft Word, but we all know that git is a much better tool for that job, am I right?

The Goal: Edit Content from Word in a git Repository

From a high-level viewpoint, what I want to do is create a modular set of content elements that can then be loaded into the client’s proposal generator tools with nice formatting.

The Process: Converting a .DOCX File into a Markdown File Using pandoc

I engaged in some trial and error (details below if you’re interested), but for my purposes, pandoc was the tool for the job. Since it’s written in Haskell, there’s an installer for Windows, MacOS, various flavors of Linux … heck, there’s even something for ChromeOS and a Docker image, to boot!

Time needed: 5 minutes.

  1. Download and install pandoc

    Save yourself some trouble download the latest release from the pandoc GitHub repository. Ubuntu’s package manager had a very outdated version, but the release in the code repository includes a handy .deb file, which was exactly what I needed for my system.

  2. Open a command prompt and navigate to the folder where your Word doc is located

    On Ubuntu, I hit CTRL+ALT+T to open a new terminal window, and then changed directories:

    cd ~/Documents/MyFolder/

    where MyFolder is the name of the directory where your Word doc is located.

  3. Convert the file

    Running pandoc is relatively straightforward for a job like this:

    pandoc MyWordDoc.docx -f docx -t markdown -o MyWordDoc.md

    where MyWordDoc.docx is the name of the Word document you want to convert and MyWordDoc.md is the name of the output file (call yours anything you want, but it’s useful to name it with a .md file extension).

Frankly, this yielded fantastic results for me. The proposal was intentionally crafted with relatively simple formatting, so there weren’t too many bizarre elements to worry about.

That said, even a cursory glance at the pandoc documentation reveals that it has substantial capabilities. I’m filing that one away for future reference! For now, I’m not even scratching the surface of what it can do.

Huge thanks to John MacFarlane for building pandoc and making it available!

That’s it! I hope this helps! Feel free to throw a comment below one way or the other.

Also: thanks to V. David Zvenyach (@vdavez) for posting this fantastic Gist on GitHub to get me started down the right path on this!

Here’s What Didn’t Work For Me

Everything that follows is just here because it’s cathartic for me to document stuff that I’m nearly 100% certain no one else will find useful. You’re welcome to ignore this part!

Mr. Zvenyach’s approach was to convert a Word document (in .DOCX format) to Markdown using 2 tools: unoconv and then pandoc.

It wasn’t until I’d installed both tools on Ubuntu and run the Word doc through unoconv that I discovered a comment on the gist which indicated that pandoc could now handle Word docs directly.

In fact, using the version of <unoconv> from Ubuntu 18.04’s package manager, I got a nasty error message:

func=xmlSecCheckVersionExt:file=xmlsec.c:line=188:obj=unknown:subj=unknown:error=19:invalid version:mode=abi compatible;expected minor version=2;real minor version=2;expected subminor version=25;real subminor version=26

The unoconv repository’s readme file mentions python compatibility issues related to the version it’s compiled with and the version used by LibreOffice/OpenOffice (my system has LibreOffice given that’s what comes with Ubuntu).

I was going to attempt a workaround as described in the readme to see if the python version might be behind the error message I got, but then I noticed that the script had output an html file.

So I ran that file through pandoc and got a Markdown file. The resulting output wasn’t pleasant.

So I decided to upgrade pandoc and just skip unoconv altogether. Seemed like it might be worth a try.

My Ubuntu 18.04 LTS system ended up with pandoc 1.19.2.4 when I installed using apt install pandoc, but the current release shown on the pandoc website as of this writing is pandoc 2.9.2.1.

Since I got such great results, that was where I stopped. But I certainly could have tried a more recent version of unoconv to see what it might be capable of doing. And I’m sure there are other ways to accomplish this, but I’ll be sticking with pandoc for now.

Be sure to let me know what you’ve discovered or run into. I’d be very interested in hearing about it! Just drop a comment below. Thanks!

New Podcast for Business People with ADHD

Last year, I started writing a little bit on my personal blog about the fact that I have ADHD.

This was quite a startling revelation for reasons that I won’t get into now. But the “shiny object syndrome” which is clearly shared by many of the:

  • entrepreneurs
  • business owners
  • freelancers (designers, software engineers, web developers, marketers, musicians, etc.)

… that I’ve known is clearly related.

Do All Entrepreneurs Have ADHD?

Clearly that would be a bogus claim to make. But the idea that entrepreneurship is correlated with ADHD is grounded in science. One study from 2018 said:

This grounds prior research on ADHD and entrepreneurship, indicating that individuals with ADHD are indeed more likely to not just espouse entrepreneurial intentions, but also to initiate business venturing.

Lerner, D.A., Verheul, I. & Thurik, R.

Resources for Entrepreneurs with ADHD

An overwhelming majority of the information online about Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (“ADHD”), formerly known as Attention Deficit Disorder (“ADD”) is focused on children, schoolwork, and parenting.

For someone like me that was diagnosed as an adult, it’s been difficult to find credible, reliable information that I can use as a business owner to help me manage the downsides of ADHD and maximize the many upsides of this powerful trait.

After working with Dana Rayburn, who is a very successful (and helpful!) coach for professionals and business leaders who have ADHD, I experienced such incredible benefits, that one day I suggested on a whim that we start a podcast.

Thankfully, Dana was a fan of the idea!

And so, Kick Some ADHD was born!

We launched a couple of weeks ago, and we’re releasing a new episode every Monday morning. In fact, today’s episode was part 2 of a two-parter on the unique ways that we procrastinate (everyone does it, but people with ADHD have refined it to new levels!) and what we can do about it.

You can find the podcast by searching Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts, Stitcher, Spotify, and most every other place you get your podcasts. Or just visit the website for links.

I hope you enjoy the show!

More Evidence that Geniuses Collaborate

This evening I picked up The Geography of Genius out of the pile of books I’m currently reading and dove in again. As I mentioned in the tweet (above), this book is the first of Eric Weiner‘s brilliant writing that I’ve been exposed to, and I am hooked.

I’m only about 100 pages in, and I’ve traveled with Weiner to Athens, Hangzhou, and now Florence. He’s making the case that something about these locales—not just the places, but the conditions that existed at specific moments in history—sparked creativity and innovation in ways that are worth studying.

Reading his accounts, you get the sense that the individual geniuses who made these places famous required the opportunity to bump up against other geniuses in a “nitro, meet glycerin” way in order to produce the explosive bursts of talent (and the products of talent) we attribute to them individually.

This line of reasoning called to mind a point that Walter Isaacson loves to make. He drills the idea home in The Innovators, but it shows up in his other works as well. The one I just finished was his brilliant biography of Leonardo Da Vinci, and it surprised me to find that he made the same point in it as well. The point he makes is that the most effective innovators (geniuses, inventors, change agents, whatever you want to label them) collaborate.

We may remember the names of certain individuals, but usually only when they were surrounded (by choice or by happenstance) with others who helped fuel their creativity, add missing ingredients, or even finish their works of genius.

How to Actually Change Nameservers for a Route 53 Domain

If you registered a domain using Route 53 (the domain registrar built in to Amazon’s AWS cloud platform) and you need to change the nameservers for it, then you might be tempted to edit the NS (“Nameserver”) records inside Route 53’s “Hosted Zones” area.

The problem is that while that change might look valid, you haven’t actually changed the authoritative Nameservers for the domain.

This is because Route 53 maintains the NS records with the domain registration details (as most domain registrars do), not with the DNS records—despite the fact that NS records can be viewed (and even seemingly edited!) with all the other DNS records at Route 53 (something that most domain registrars in my experience do not do).

I found this out the hard way… by editing the NS records shown in the “Hosted zones” for a particular domain, then waiting. And waiting. And waiting. (If you’re not sure if your settings changes have been effective, take a look at How to Check the Propagation of Your NS Records below.)

Route 53 is a Fantastic DNS Hosting Service. Why Change?

Why even bother switching from Route 53 as the DNS host at all?

It’s a great question. In this particular situation, I found myself needing to use Cloudflare’s DNS in order to accommodate a CNAME record at the root (“zone apex”) of my domain. This is technically not allowed, but Cloudflare facilitates it via some magic they call CNAME flattening. Amazon’s Route 53 actually has something kinda similar they call Alias records, but this turned out to not work for my needs.

Where to Find (and Change) the REAL NS Records for a Route 53 Domain

Note: this section only applies to domains registered with Route 53 from AWS (“Amazon Web Services”). Registered at Route 53 is not necessarily the same thing as hosted (at least with respect to DNS) by Route 53. If your domain was registered elsewhere (e.g. GoDaddy or a registrar that offers a better value like Namecheap,) then the authoritative Nameserver (NS) records must be changed at the registrar, not the DNS host.

Time needed: 5 minutes.

Step By Step Instructions for Changing the Authoritative Nameserver (“NS”) Records for Your Domain Registered at Route 53

  1. Go to Route 53 from the AWS Console

    Click here to go directly to Route 53 in the AWS Console (opens in a new tab). If you’re not signed in to your AWS account, you’ll need to do so.

  2. Click on “Registered domains”

    If you’re using a desktop browser, you can find “Registered domains” in the menu on the left-hand side, under the heading, “Domains.”

  3. Click on the domain name whose NS records you want to change

    A list of domains you have registered via the AWS domain registrar connected to the Route 53 service will appear. Click on the domain you need to change.

    Note: if you do not see the name of the domain in this list, then the domain wasn’t registered via the AWS account you are logged into.

    If you are certain that Route 53 / AWS is the domain registrar, then you may need to log in to a different AWS account.

    If you are unsure which registrar the domain was registered with, you may find it helpful to run a WHOIS search for authoritative information about the domain you’re working with. ICANN operates a WHOIS service, and it is arguably the most authoritative one available. Simply enter the domain name into the search box and look for the section labeled, “Registrar.” If you see “Amazon Registrar, Inc.” or something similar, then Amazon / AWS is indeed the registrar. If not, you will need to log in to system for the domain registrar shown in the WHOIS record in order to change the NS records. If the name of the registrar shown doesn’t look familiar to you, try finding it in this list of ICANN-Accredited Registrars. Sometimes the names change or don’t seem related to the website used to registered the domain.

  4. Locate the “Name servers” section

    From a desktop browser, the “Name servers” section can be found in the right-hand column of domain settings.



    It’s likely that you will see the old settings here, which in most cases will be Amazon’s own nameservers, since Route 53 puts those values in by default when a domain is registered. The image above shows the new settings for my domain, since I grabbed the screenshot after saving the settings.

  5. Click “Add or edit name servers”

    To change the nameservers, click the “Add or edit name servers” link. You can see it in the screenshot (above) in Step 4. It’s the blue link inside the orange circle.

  6. Edit the name servers.

    You will see a popup (shown below) with an editable field for each of the name server (“NS”) records for your domain. Simply edit the contents of each box as needed. Often, only 2 NS records are necessary, but your requirements will vary depending upon the hosting provider / service you’re switching to for your domain.



    If you need to delete extraneous Nameserver records as I did (since AWS adds 4 NS records by default and Cloudflare only provided 2), you should see a small “x” to the right of the box containing the records you want to delete. In most cases, you will want to eliminate any extra records. Leaving them can cause problems if you’re not absolutely certain that you want them to remain.

    To add more records, simply start typing in the empty box that will appear below the last record. You will see another empty box appear below the one you’re typing in. Repeat as needed.

  7. Click the “Update” button to save your changes.

    The last thing you need to do is simply hit the “Update” button. You can see it in blue in the screenshot (above) in Step 6.

    That’s it!

What to Do If Your Nameserver (NS) Records Change Is Taking a Long Time to Propagate

In my case, I began this process by changing the NS records in the Route 53 “Hosted zone” for my domain, and I then waited nearly 48 hours for my NS record changes to propagate. While many DNS servers found in the DNS propagation checkers did, in fact, show the new settings, a number of DNS servers around the world still showed my old NS records instead.

This was troubling to me, because for many years now, DNS changes—especially nameserver changes—often propagate very quickly. In fact, changes like this often propagate in seconds or minutes, not 24 hours, 48 hours, or even 72 hours like in the good old days. These faster propagation timeframes are especially common for newly registered or infrequently used (read: not hugely popular) domain names, since DNS records for these are frequently not found in the caches of very many DNS servers at all.

It was only as I was about to contact Cloudflare support that I stopped to try to analyze why that little fact was bugging me so much.

How to Check the Propagation of Your NS Records

You can easily test for the global propagation of any DNS change using a propagation checker like these:

There’s Something Strange Going On

For my barely-used domain, the old records shouldn’t have been appearing at all in most of the far-flung global DNS servers, and since ICANN’s WHOIS database also returned the old values, I realized that something wasn’t right. There had to be a different setting somewhere that was more authoritative.

Ultimately, it was this answer to a thread the Cloudflare Community that helped me realize my mistake. Thank you, @mnordhoff!

This Seems Unnecessarily Confusing

In my experience, most domain registrars make this process a bit simpler by only providing one place to change the name servers for a domain. In hindsight, it is obvious to me that changing the NS records should happen at the registrar and not at the DNS settings level. But having never needed to make this particular change for a Route 53 domain, it never occurred to me that the NS records I found under “Hosted zones” weren’t the actual NS records for the domain.

Further confusing the matter was the simple fact that some DNS queries that I ran did return values that reflected the edits I made in Route 53’s “Hosted zones” area.

I’m not clear on why Amazon Web Services designed Route 53 to work this way, but perhaps there’s some scenario or another that requires this level of configurability.

Thanks, Cloudflare!

At the end of the day, I’m grateful that Cloudflare’s system refused to consider the NS change complete until the correct records had been changed.

Had Cloudflare recognized the changes I made, I most likely would have carried on with the very mistaken belief that everything was working properly. In reality, some (if not many) systems that tried to access my domain would have encountered weird errors. I probably would not have found out about those issues for quite some time, if ever!

Finally!

Incidentally, once I edited the Name server settings found under Route 53’s “Registered domains” area, I noticed that it was only a matter of seconds before both ICANN’s WHOIS database reflected the change. This seemed to coincide with Cloudflare’s system recognizing the change as well.

I hope you find this useful! This was one heck of a perplexing situation for me—especially after managing domains for ~20 years!

Feel free to throw questions my way in the comments below. I’ll be glad to tackle them when I have a chance. You can also hit me up on Twitter. Cheers!

How to Stop Websites from Offering to Send Notifications

Perhaps someone out there woke up one day and thought to themselves:

You know what I want? I want nearly every website I visit today to throw a pop-up in my face offering to notify me about whatever they find exciting! That way, when I’m minding my own business trying to get stuff done, I’ll have brand new distractions to prevent me from being able to concentrate!

…but that isn’t something I’ve dreamed of, personally. And you may have detected a mild tone of sarcasm here (if not, I apologize that it wasn’t more obvious), but the bottom line is that I really don’t want to be bothered.

I don’t want to be bothered with the question about whether I’d like to get notifications, not to mention notifications themselves!

Good News: You Can Block These in Your Browser

And I mean you can block the questions as well as the actual notifications.

Thanks to Steve Gibson from Gibson Research Corporation, who mentioned this on a recent episode of the Security Now! podcast, here’s a handy set of instructions for you.

Time needed: 2 minutes.

How to Block Websites from Offering Notifications in Google Chrome

  1. Open Chrome’s 3-dot menu and click “Settings”

    Using any desktop version of Google Chrome*, locate the 3-dot menu (from Windows and Linux, this is typically at the top right), click it, and then choose “Settings” from the menu that drops down.

    *or Chromium, if you’re rocking the open source version like I am.Security Now!

  2. Click “Advanced” (at the bottom), then find “Content Settings” (or “Site Settings”) in the “Privacy and Security” section

    The setting we’re looking for is hidden under the “Advanced” section, which you can find by scrolling all the way to the bottom of the “Settings” page that opens up. Once you click “Advanced,” the page expands and you’ll see a new section called “Privacy and Security” which contains a number of rows of options.

    Look for the option labeled “Content Settings” (that’s what it was called in my version) or “Site Settings” (this is what Steve Gibson’s instructions said, so his version—and maybe yours too!—might be different).

  3. Click on the “Notifications” option, then move the “Ask before sending” slider to the left

    When you click “Notifications,” a new screen opens up, and if your version of Google Chrome still has the default setting, you’ll see a line near the top that reads, “Ask before sending (recommended).”

    When you move that slider to the left, it turns the notifications requests off, and you should see the text change to “Blocked”.

    Voila! No more requests from websites!

    (While you’re here, you should see a list of any specific sites you’ve either “blocked” or “allowed” notifications from, and you can review/edit your settings.)

How to Block Notification Requests in Firefox

If you use Mozilla Firefox, which is my “daily driver” browser these days, you can block these notifications requests there as well. Here’s how:

  1. Open a new tab in Firefox and type the following in the address bar:

    about:config
  2. You will most likely see a warning that says, “This might void your warranty!” If so, click “I accept the risk!” to continue.
  3. You’ll see a search box at the top of a long list of configuration items. Type in:

    webnotifications

    …and press “Enter”
  4. Locate the setting named, “dom.notifications.enabled” and toggle it to “false.” (I did this by double-clicking it.) It should turn “bold” in appearance, and the “status” column should change to “modified.”
  5. Close the tab. You’re done!

How to Test Your Browser to Confirm the New Settings

As Steve Gibson pointed out, Mozilla (makers of Firefox) were kind enough to build a page just so we can test our browsers to see if the notifications settings change was successful or not.

Well actually, the page was built to serve as part of Mozilla’s excellent developer documentation, but if you visit it from a browser that has the notifications enabled (which they are in most browsers by default), it will pop up a request every time!

The page is called Using the Notifications API. Click it now to see if your settings change worked!

Did You Find This Useful?

I hope so! Feel free to share it, of course. But maybe head on over to Twitter and give Steve Gibson a quick “thank you” for sharing!

And if you’re interested in security and privacy online, be sure to subscribe to Security Now! on your favorite podcast app. It’s worth the listen!

Audio: Demosthenes by Plutarch

Audio reading of Demosthenes from the John Dryden translation of Plutarch’s Lives.

https://audio.epiphanydigest.com/demosthenes_plutarch_dryden-audio_david_g_johnson.mp3

This recording is read and produced by David G. Johnson, and is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License (CC BY-SA 4.0).

You are free to use this recording for any purpose, (including commercial) as long as you provide proper attribution.

Beware United’s Basic Economy Fare

I’m not super-picky when it comes to air travel.

Many consultants demand Business Class or First Class seats as part of their contracts, and while I definitely see the rationale—time is valuable, reducing the frustrations associated with traveling allows one to be fresher and more at their best, etc.—it’s never felt right to me to push those kinds of requirements onto our clients who are already making substantial investments in our fees.

And so, I often look for ways to minimize travel expenses. But boy did I get nailed by that recently.

Surprise! You Can’t Sit With Your Wife…

Not long ago, I booked flights for my wife and me (she works closely with me these days) via Expedia to go spend some time with one of our clients. We looked at a bunch of different options that were all roughly in the same price range, and ultimately made our decisions mostly around departure and arrival times.

It was only after I booked the flights that I got an email from United “reminding me” of the restrictions on the “Basic Economy” fare:

Screenshot from United’s email with the subject line, “Important: Basic Economy restrictions on your United flight”

Oh. You wanted to choose your seat? We’re sorry. That privilege is reserved for people who paid more than $100 for the upsell to “Economy.”

Footnote #1 reads:

Seats are assigned prior to boarding, and customers traveling together, including families, may not be able to sit together. Advance seat assignments may be available for purchase during booking and up until check-in opens. Prices start at $5, based on route and availability. You will also not be eligible to purchase Economy Plus® seating or premium cabin upgrades, or receive Economy Plus subscription benefits. With standard Economy, customers traveling together can choose seats together if open seats are available.

Oh. Did you plan to actually sit next to your wife on the plane? We’re sorry. That privilege is reserved for people who paid more than $100 for the upsell to “Economy”

Oh. You wanted to bring a carry-on bag with you on the plane? We’re sorry. That’s only available for people who weren’t too cheap to pay for “Economy” tickets.

Mind you, I knew I couldn’t change the flight. I also noticed the nonrefundable nature of the tickets. These aspects of the airfare I chose were clear.

But these other restrictions were not clear at all during the checkout process at Expedia. And I pay attention to details like this, as a rule.

After tweeting about it, United was quick to let me know that I could potentially pay for the privilege of selecting seats:

United: Show Some Basic Courtesy and Make This Clear, Will You?

In my opinion, if you’re going to compete with other airlines on a marketplace like Expedia, you should go to great lengths to inform passengers when basic privileges like selecting a seat and taking a carry-on with you aren’t included in your fare. The other airlines whose flights I passed over because the times were slightly less convenient included those privileges at the price point that I paid.

There were 2 major indications (after the purchase, of course), that things were awry.

The first was that I got an email from Expedia announcing that my seat assignment process had encountered an error. Funny. I don’t recall selecting seats. Hmmmm…

Then, the email (screenshotted above) from United which purported to remind me of the restrictions came in. That is how you draw attention to the differences between fares—not by hiding it in all the mouse-point type that a user has to click through in order to complete the booking process. (And I’m being generous here. I’m making the assumption that this information was actually in the mouse-point type on the page. Obviously, I can’t go back and confirm.)

I did skim the information presented to me at the time and didn’t notice these restrictions. Had they been obvious, I would’ve noticed it and chosen different flights.

Anyway, that “reminder” email from United Airlines went on to ask for feedback since this is a “new fare,” and it was immediately clear to me that they were trying to head off problems before I arrived at the airport and learned that I had none of the few remaining basic privileges that a passenger should be able to expect.

So now I’ve spent $76 in fees just to select the seats we’ll be occupying for our flights so that we don’t end up being “automatically assigned” the least-desirable middle seats on the plane. But even after doing that, it doesn’t appear that we can bring a full-sized carry-on bag aboard the flight. Thanks a lot, United.

I’m not the only one who has noticed just how bad the “Basic Economy” fare from United is:

United Airlines Basic Economy fares are more restrictive and punitive than any of the other US carriers. From having to see an agent at the airport to check-in when not checking a bag to not getting a carry-on bag to the worst seats being automatically assigned to basic economy passengers at check-in — United’s Basic Economy is the worst.

— The Points Guy’s “How To Survive Basic Economy on United Airlines

After this experience, and given United’s response to my Tweet, they’re going to the bottom of my list. Right down there next to Spirit Airlines, where apparently they now belong.

Audio: Pericles by Plutarch

Audio reading of Pericles from the Dryden Translation of Plutarch’s Lives.

https://audio.epiphanydigest.com/pericles_plutarch_dryden-audio_david_g_johnson.mp3

This recording is read and produced by David G. Johnson, and is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License (CC BY-SA 4.0).

You are free to use this recording for any purpose, (including commercial) as long as you provide proper attribution.

Ubuntu SSH Client: Too Many Authentication Attempts

I’ve been using a “config” file located at ~/.ssh/config to list out the identities of the various SSH hosts that I connect to on a regular basis. It was successfully preventing me from having to keep track of the usernames for the various accounts I was connecting to on the servers, but when I got to a certain number of entries in the file, I started getting this error:

Received disconnect from *HOST*: 2: Too many authentication failures for *USERNAME*

I Googled around and tried various solutions, including using ssh-add and had limited success, but running an ssh -v hostentry command for a given connection (the -v puts the command in verbose mode) allowed me to see that my machine was still offering up multiple keys.

This seems counter-intuitive to me. The whole point of using the config file is to tell it which key to use, right? Why should I even need to add the identity to the SSH agent? And I wasn’t about to increase the number of retries on the servers. That seems like a recipe for disaster. I should only need one try because I have the right key sitting here!

I finally ran the right Google search and discovered this SuperUser (StackOverflow) question, which had the missing component I needed in one of its answers.

The critical element in the config file that forces the SSH client to use only the key specified is this line:

    IdentitiesOnly yes

Adding that to each of the entries in the config file (immediately below the “IdentifyFile” declaration) did the trick.

So now a typical entry in my config file looks something like this:

Host myshortcut
  HostName somedomain.com
  user someuser
  IdentityFile ~/.ssh/somekey_rsa
  IdentitiesOnly yes

I hope this helps someone!