115
submitted 2 months ago by lemmyreader@lemmy.ml to c/linux@lemmy.ml
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] lemmyng@lemmy.ca 38 points 2 months ago

Just because it has a CVE number doesn't mean it's exploitable. Of the 800 CVEs, which ones are in the KEV catalogue? What are the attack vectors? What mitigations are available?

[-] taladar@sh.itjust.works 27 points 2 months ago

The idea that it is somehow possible to determine that for each and every bug is a crazy fantasy by the people who don't like to update to the latest version.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] lightnegative@lemmy.world 6 points 2 months ago

If I had a dollar for the number of BS CVE's submitted by security hopefuls trying to pad their resumes...

[-] KindaABigDyl@programming.dev 33 points 2 months ago

Great reason to push more code out of the kernel and into user land

[-] kabi@lemm.ee 31 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)
[-] TimeSquirrel@kbin.social 14 points 2 months ago

I dunno, Stallman, it's been 30 years, you got something for us?

[-] lightnegative@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago

I'd just like to interject for a moment. What you’re refering to as Linux, is in fact, GNU/LInux, or as I’ve recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux. Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by the GNU corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX.

[-] jodanlime@midwest.social 5 points 2 months ago

I think we should just resurrect Plan 9 instead.

[-] Peter1986C@lemmings.world 3 points 2 months ago

Plan 9 is also monolithic, according to wikipedia. For BSD it depends.

[-] jodanlime@midwest.social 3 points 2 months ago

I mean, you're right but I still want to see a modernized plan 9, I just think it would be neat.

[-] OmnipotentEntity@beehaw.org 3 points 2 months ago
[-] mexicancartel@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 2 months ago
[-] EinfachUnersetzlich@lemm.ee 1 points 2 months ago
[-] mexicancartel@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 2 months ago

It means anyone including microsoft or apple can use the code contribution or take the entire softwarw and make some modifications and sell it proprietary. Any optimisations or features made by community can be proprietarised

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] barsoap@lemm.ee 2 points 2 months ago

L4. HURD never panned out, and L4 is where the microkernel research settled: Memory protection, scheduling, IPC in the kernel the rest outside and there's also important insights as to the APIs to do that with. In particular the IPC mechanism is opaque, the kernel doesn't actually read the messages which was the main innovation over Mach.

Literally billions of devices run OKL4, seL4 systems are also in mass production. Think broadband processors, automotive, that kind of stuff.

The kernel being watertight doesn't mean that your system is, though, you generally don't need kernel privileges to exfiltrate any data or generally mess around, root suffices.

If you want to see this happening -- I guess port AMDGPU to an L4?

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Rustmilian@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

eBPF is looking great.

[-] 4am@lemm.ee 2 points 2 months ago

So what you are saying is “mach was right”?

[-] acockworkorange@mander.xyz 1 points 2 months ago

Everybody knows it was. Even Linus said a microkernel architecture was better. He just wanted something working “now” for his hobby project, and microkernel research was still ongoing then.

[-] Catsrules@lemmy.ml 23 points 2 months ago

Best way I found it running this command

rm -rf /

Then do a reboot just to be sure.

Good luck compromising my system after that.

FYI This is a joke Don't actually run this command :)

[-] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 8 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

sudo apt-get remove systemd (don't actually run this)

[-] racketlauncher831@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 months ago

I ran it and followed a documentation to install Void Linux and now it runs so much smoother!

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] qaz@lemmy.world 7 points 2 months ago

It won't work without --no-preserve-root

[-] lordnikon@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

good thing that command won't do anything anymore

[-] bloodfart@lemmy.ml 20 points 2 months ago
[-] Galli@hexbear.net 4 points 2 months ago

"if" gcc had a Ken Thompson hack how do you secure checks notes anything

[-] pmk@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 2 months ago

I'm genuinely worried sometimes that a Ken hack has been introduced. I don't know by who, but possibly some government agency. Then again, we also have a Minix system built into the CPU doing god knows what and we just accept that.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[-] BigTrout75@lemmy.world 17 points 2 months ago

Article for the sake of having an article.

[-] swordgeek@lemmy.ca 16 points 2 months ago

Step one: stop listening to anything from Ziff-Davis.

[-] bhamlin@lemmy.world 10 points 2 months ago

I mean, this isn't any different for Windows or macos. The difference is the culture around the kernel.

With Linux there are easily orders of magnitude more eyeballs on it than the others combined. And fixes are something anyone with a desire to do so can apply. You don't have to wait for a fix to be packaged and delivered.

[-] PlexSheep@infosec.pub 8 points 2 months ago

Security is not a binary variable, but managed in terms of risk. Update your stuff, don't expose it to the open Internet if it doesn't need it, and so on. If it's a server, it should probably have unattended upgrades.

[-] qaz@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

If it's a server, it should probably have unattended upgrades.

Interesting opinion, I've always heard that unattended upgrades were a terrible option for servers because it might randomly break your system or reboot when an important service is running.

[-] taladar@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 months ago

There are two schools of thought here. The "never risk anything that could potentially break something" school and the "make stuff robust enough that it will deal with broken states". Usually the former doesn't work so well once something actually breaks.

[-] PlexSheep@infosec.pub 2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Both my Debian 12 servers run with unattended upgrades. I've never had anything break from the changes in packages, I think. I tend to use docker and on one even lxc containers (proxmox), but the lxc containers also have unattended upgrades running.

Do you just update your stuff manually or do you not update at all? I'm subscribed to the Debian security mailing list, and they frequently find something that means people should upgrade, recently something with the glibc.

Debian especially is focused on being very stable, so updating should never break anything that wasn't broken before. Sometimes docker containers don't like to restart so they refuse, but then I did something stupid.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] moonpiedumplings@programming.dev 2 points 2 months ago

That only applies to unstable distros. Stable distros, like debian, maintain their own versions of packages.

Debian in particular, only includes security patches and changes in their packages - no new features at all.* This means risk of breakage and incompatibilitu is very low, basically nil.

*exceot for certain packages which aren't viable to maintain, like Firefox or other browsers.

[-] exu@feditown.com 2 points 2 months ago

Not having automated updates can quickly lead to not doing updates at all. Same goes for backups.

Whenever possible, one should automate tedious stuff.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] MonkderDritte@feddit.de 8 points 2 months ago

pacman -Syu

Rhetorical question?

[-] django@discuss.tchncs.de 7 points 2 months ago

Install all the patches immediately.

[-] sonori@beehaw.org 5 points 2 months ago

Crontab dnf update -y and trust that if anything breaks uptime monitoing/ someone will let me know sooner or later.

[-] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 3 points 2 months ago

Don't use cron for that. Use the package managers auto update utility. Plus if you use the proper tools you can set it to security updates only

[-] MadMadBunny@lemmy.ca 3 points 2 months ago
[-] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Honestly it is a valid option for critical systems. It is a bad idea to connect water treatment plans to the internet for example

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 23 Apr 2024
115 points (88.6% liked)

Linux

45765 readers
872 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS