←back to thread

414 points st_goliath | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0.421s | source
Show context
teddyh ◴[] No.43972000[source]
Note: In Debian, GNU screen is not installed with setuid-root privileges.
replies(4): >>43972155 #>>43972240 #>>43972667 #>>43972691 #
perlgeek ◴[] No.43972691[source]
And the package in Debian Stable (aka bookworm) is too old to be affected by the vulnerabilities in 5.0.0.

I used to hate that Debian always was behind on software versions, but now I use different package sources for the few applications where I really don't want to rely on old software (like browsers), and otherwise doing great with the old stuff :-)

replies(2): >>43972806 #>>43980202 #
bandrami ◴[] No.43980202[source]
Debian stable users missed heartbleed entirely. I think the glacial pace is underrated.
replies(2): >>43980272 #>>43982665 #
krferriter ◴[] No.43980272[source]
Glacial page bedrock of an OS with optional sandboxed more-up-to-date userspace packages and runtimes that can be layered on top of the host system was the dream of flatpak/snap/appimage, right?
replies(1): >>43980724 #
1. bandrami ◴[] No.43980724[source]
Yes, though that comes with its own headaches since the data those sandboxed applications are supposed to touch are the only actually valuable data on my computer. (How many versions of OpenSSL are currently running on my Silverblue system? I literally couldn't tell you.) My spreadsheet is only vouched for by some random dude on Flathub and it can steal all my financial information. But at least it can't add a printer, or delete a system file that I can freely download from the Internet at any time.
replies(1): >>43996520 #
2. rlpb ◴[] No.43996520[source]
This a decent observation, but I would add that some other Flatpak app that you run might be correctly sandboxed from accessing your financial information, and this is the real benefit of such a system.