[lkml]   [2008]   [Jul]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: The state of linux security
    On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 04:05:07PM +0000, Cheradenine Zakalwe wrote:
    > Right, for a start, if I was a professor at university I'd much rather
    > some "smart" students crashed 100 boxes a day for a year than one
    > owned several servers. In any case, it seems absurd that anybody
    > looking for security holes to either subvert or crash systems would be
    > deterred by the lack of security commit messages. They already know
    > what they are looking for. On the other hand, there has to be some
    > metrics available for normal people to make an informed decision about
    > the relative security of linux and the likely hood that smart people
    > are able to cause a bit of mindless vandalism or get up to much worse.
    > Your hand waving and obfuscation simply do not wash. The bugs being
    > talked about are not just any bugs. They have their own commercial
    > value because they can allow the complete subversion of your systems.

    Bear in mind that top linux development does not happen in a
    corporation. So "commercial value" is a complete non-issue.
    Corporations like RedHat and SUSE care about this though. If
    you want guarantees and documented security - that is where you
    want to go. Not to the kernel mailing list.

    > This (for most people I'd guess) is far more dangerous than simply
    > having their computers crash.

    Sure. And kernel developers don't want their machines
    taken over either. So they do fix security bugs.

    > This business of passing the buck onto vendors is also absurd. If

    Not absurd if you think about it. Most linux developers don't develop
    linux for money - they don't have customers - so customers have *no*
    hold over them at all. Vendors are the ones who have to care, so they
    do that.

    Still, linux security is good for a different reason - there is prestige
    in making linux good, and so developers strive for that. Also,
    security-concerned vendors are always welcome to bring security

    > security is not built into your development mindset and models from

    Each developer has the mindset "what I want from linux". That's
    what you get from such a loosely organized effort. But many actually
    wants security, so you get that even without a clear policy.

    > One more thing I'd like to throw out there on the issue of
    > accountability is this: How do I know that some developers have not
    > been paid to specifically introduce some obscure security flaw? Given
    > that such subversions happen frequently in every other field of human
    > endeavour where potential profit is involved, this is not beyond the
    > realms of possibility.

    This is much harder to do in linux, than in a closed-source system. If I
    bribe a key microsoft developer to put in a backdoor, then nobody notice
    until I exploit it - for the source code is a trade secret.

    If i bribe a linux developer to put in a backdoor, then this developer's
    patch will likely be rejected by the upstream maintainer or Linus, for
    containing a griveous scurity flaw. And if it isn't caught immediately,
    then it will still be open for all to see.

    Also, bribing a key linux developer is probably much harder, since
    they work for pride instead of money. Someone getting caught
    would likely never be trusted in open-source development again,
    a dramatic loss for such a person.

    > If the attitudes of the people at the top of linux development don't
    > change this is the end of the linux experiment for me and i'm sure
    > many other people. The percieved benifits of transparancy, openness
    > and cost will have been completely smashed for the vast majority of
    > users. This is not something to be taken lightly.

    Current attitudes has brought linux where it is today - it works very

    Helge Hafting

     \ /
      Last update: 2008-07-20 13:03    [W:0.025 / U:31.100 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site