Well, it’s more so that I wished the open source community wasn’t as averse to implementing a security model that wasn’t heavily reliant on the systems being obscure. Security through obscurity is a horrid way to do such things, but it seems like that’s the way things were done before I got here.
It would be nice to see the vision of the SecureBlue project come through elsewhere in the desktop Linux world, but any time someone so much as hints at fixing the flagrant security issues of something like the AUR, all they get is dismissal and knuckle dragging in response. I’m not a blind shill for corporate products by any means, I just would like for the community to quit treating security as an afterthought, because it’s truly needed if we want to keep the new converts safe from the looming threats that are coming day after day.
Acknowledging the successes of projects that just so happen to not be community driven isn’t shilling inherently and I’m a little perturbed at that conclusion you immediately jumped to.
My bad then. I’m sorry I thought you were a shill, but those do come through here pretty often to dump their winblow and crApple dung.
As I said in another response, security is difficult to marry with convenience. You can see it on mobile operating systems where a flashlight app asks for network and storage permissions, and users just accept because they can’t be bothered with even reading it.
I too recognise that there is a lot of room to improve, but I’m hopeful that with more attention, linux will become more secure. There will be more brainpower and money flowing into it.
secureblue is for those whose first priority is using Linux, and second priority is security. secureblue does not claim to be the most secure option available on the desktop. We are limited in that regard by the current state of desktop Linux standardization, tooling, and upstream security development. What we aim for instead is to be the most secure option for those who already intend to use Linux. As such, if security is your first priority, secureblue may not be the best option for you.
If security is your FIRST priority, they outright say their work is limited. So… that’s where I’m getting it from.
Linux is used in security contexts. What do you think Kali Linux is for? There’s a linux distro that is literally a hypervisor to separate everything into VMs (Qubes). Fedora allows you to activate more security options like SELinux (which is also one way Android achieves more security BTW). And I could go on, but it seems you chose to be ignorant before making the claim linux was insecure.
Linux distros babe many flavors and eachallows a different focus.
Many desktop Linux distros have poor security defaults. Fedora even disables the restrictions on ptrace by default, which is strange considering the browser sandbox needs ptrace restrictions in order to function properly. Debian and Ubuntu default to apparmor which is very insecure (remember crackarmor?) and Arch has basically no security ootb and the AUR is essentially NEEDED in order to use it for most things, despite how unvetted and messy it is. Kali is not for daily driving, for the record.
I implore you to read SecureBlue’s documentation which is where the bulk of my knowledge has been from. Even Android is not as secure as it could be, there is a reason that GrapheneOS, the pinnacle of Android security, doesn’t even consider their build of Android secure enough.
Fedora’s choice to have ptrace_scope 0 sure is strange, it seems they had a discussion about it to revert it back to the upstream default of 1.
SEL being important was actually the main reason why in the light of recent kernel vulnerabilities I switched back to openSUSE, after being on Void for a while as inspired by this guide.
That the AUR is insecure lays basically in its name, I really don’t get why people would use for anything but the most niche packages.
What Android is doing well compared to Linux is that it has proper per application compartmentalization, whereas *nix systems would require each program to be run by a different user to separate them, though Linux is also improving in that regard, for example through SEL or the flatpak sandbox.
A true turfblaster found in our midst.
What is a turfblaster? I’m confused but maybe someone can explain that to me
Astroturfing. Pretending to be grassroots but just being a corporate shill to be for or promote corporate services and products.
Turfblaster is a word for someone who astroturfs.
Well, it’s more so that I wished the open source community wasn’t as averse to implementing a security model that wasn’t heavily reliant on the systems being obscure. Security through obscurity is a horrid way to do such things, but it seems like that’s the way things were done before I got here.
It would be nice to see the vision of the SecureBlue project come through elsewhere in the desktop Linux world, but any time someone so much as hints at fixing the flagrant security issues of something like the AUR, all they get is dismissal and knuckle dragging in response. I’m not a blind shill for corporate products by any means, I just would like for the community to quit treating security as an afterthought, because it’s truly needed if we want to keep the new converts safe from the looming threats that are coming day after day.
Acknowledging the successes of projects that just so happen to not be community driven isn’t shilling inherently and I’m a little perturbed at that conclusion you immediately jumped to.
My bad then. I’m sorry I thought you were a shill, but those do come through here pretty often to dump their winblow and crApple dung.
As I said in another response, security is difficult to marry with convenience. You can see it on mobile operating systems where a flashlight app asks for network and storage permissions, and users just accept because they can’t be bothered with even reading it.
I too recognise that there is a lot of room to improve, but I’m hopeful that with more attention, linux will become more secure. There will be more brainpower and money flowing into it.
Maybe it is someone who blasts astroturfing? Idk
I mean I guess following the messaging of one of the only explicitly security-focused Linux distros is considered “astro turfing” then? Hmm.
From their site directly:
If security is your FIRST priority, they outright say their work is limited. So… that’s where I’m getting it from.
Linux is used in security contexts. What do you think Kali Linux is for? There’s a linux distro that is literally a hypervisor to separate everything into VMs (Qubes). Fedora allows you to activate more security options like SELinux (which is also one way Android achieves more security BTW). And I could go on, but it seems you chose to be ignorant before making the claim linux was insecure.
Linux distros babe many flavors and eachallows a different focus.
Many desktop Linux distros have poor security defaults. Fedora even disables the restrictions on ptrace by default, which is strange considering the browser sandbox needs ptrace restrictions in order to function properly. Debian and Ubuntu default to apparmor which is very insecure (remember crackarmor?) and Arch has basically no security ootb and the AUR is essentially NEEDED in order to use it for most things, despite how unvetted and messy it is. Kali is not for daily driving, for the record.
I implore you to read SecureBlue’s documentation which is where the bulk of my knowledge has been from. Even Android is not as secure as it could be, there is a reason that GrapheneOS, the pinnacle of Android security, doesn’t even consider their build of Android secure enough.
Fedora’s choice to have ptrace_scope 0 sure is strange, it seems they had a discussion about it to revert it back to the upstream default of 1.
SEL being important was actually the main reason why in the light of recent kernel vulnerabilities I switched back to openSUSE, after being on Void for a while as inspired by this guide.
That the AUR is insecure lays basically in its name, I really don’t get why people would use for anything but the most niche packages.
What Android is doing well compared to Linux is that it has proper per application compartmentalization, whereas *nix systems would require each program to be run by a different user to separate them, though Linux is also improving in that regard, for example through SEL or the flatpak sandbox.
Yeah I pretty much chose to take matters into my own hands by importing some of the SecureBlue defaults (with a few modifications) into my config.