Re: How could we get society to adequately fund free software developers
Brian May via luv-main <luv-main-mJLk/csuh/[email protected]> Sun, 31 Mar 2024 09:40:59 +1100
| Newsgroups | gmane.org.user-groups.linux.luv.general,gmane.linux.australia |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
AnĂbal Monsalve Salazar via luv-main <[email protected]> writes: > How could we get society to adequately fund free software developers to > avoid this type of security threat? > > At this time, the consequences of this injection of malicious code into > xz-utils are not yet known with certainty. On one had, free software developers do need to be funded. Especially if people are using and relying on their software. https://xkcd.com/2347/ On the other hand, it is perfectly normal part of OSS for one maintainer to pass the reins on to another developer. I have seen it happen numerous times (as orginal developer, as new developer, and as user). And I am the maintainer of a number of projects that I only barely keep up with. This requires the new users trust the new maintainer. But I imagine in many cases users aren't even aware that there is a new maintainer. Even if you trust the new maintainer, do you also trust their security practises? There was at least one case where malware was found due to a hacked account. https://therecord.media/malware-found-in-npm-package-with-millions-of-weekly-downloads Most of the time none of is a news worthy story however. Either The new maintainers do a good job of contining the project. Or the circumstances change and the new maintainers end up in the exact same situation as the old maintainer. I have seen both sitations happen. This story reminds me of an npm package. The maintainer passed on the job to a new maintainer as they were no longer interested in maintaining the package. The new maintainer added a dependancy on another package which had back door code. Or something like that. Oh, think I found it: https://medium.com/intrinsic-blog/compromised-npm-package-event-stream-d47d08605502 Then again for another example, have a look at redis. Seems they managed to alienate the entire community with one PR (https://github.com/redis/redis/pull/13157). As a result there are a number of forks, such as keydb. How do we know we can trust the new maintainers? It probably is going to be OK, right? But is anybody checking the commits they make? It also makes me a bit uncomfortable with how shared libraries work. The recent attack demonstrates that a shared library can compromise a completely unrelated binary. It is a bit unfair to blame systemd here, it could be a NSS or PAM module that pulls in the compromised library. Makes me think maybe we need better isolation - but not sure how you would do this or if it is feasible. -- Brian May @ Linux Penguins _______________________________________________ luv-main mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]