Re: xz exploit and backdoor
Rick Moen <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.org.user-groups.linux.cabal |
|---|---|
| Organization | If you lived here, you'd be $HOME already. |
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Quoting Ivan Sergio Borgonovo ([email protected]): > So you agree with me, but you don't want to. You're moving know-how > and complexity from one domain to another ;) There are always tradeoffs, but the bar to be cleared in _merely_ reading configuration files and init scripts, and then shutting off functionality you don't want and won't use, is a very low one. Yes, most Linux users cannot be bothered, because Linux users in the main are like all other OS users, people who never even look at the default setting, let alone consider changing anything. But I'm referring to the subset who are server sysadmins. I don't want to go all greybeard and pull out the "When I was young, we walked to school through the snow both ways" routine, but back when I started, that was routine. Beyond that, the standard way to learn what you needed running was: Switch it off in the runtime state, and see if you miss it. If the system goes 'splody, reboot and regroup. Once one grasps the value of taking charge of software runtime configuration, it's not exactly brain surgery, on most distros, to read the docs about how to modify a distro source package to change that _one darned thing_ that annoys you, compile a local package, and install it. And, in that context, saying one day "I think I want to try NSD instead of BIND9" is easy-peasy by comparison. You say that's "moving complexity". OK. But I call it "actually doing the system administration task you came to do". But please note that nowhere am I urging this onto anyone else. It's none of my business what if any local policy a different sysadmin implements -- unless he/she is paying my wages or vice-versa. > Compiling [e.g., Postfix] yourself just to reduce > attack surface will make things more complicated, hard to manage > etc... doesn't come for free and it has its own draw backs even in > terms of security. Clearly, there must be enough benefit to offset the nuisance and extra work. And that is an individual judgement -- as I would have thought obvious. -- Cheers, Everything is gone; Rick Moen Your life's work has been destroyed. [email protected] Squeeze trigger (yes/no)? McQ! (4x80) -- David Carlson (winner, haiku error message contest)