No announcement yet.

Linux Mint Finds Many Of Its Users Are Running Behind On Security Updates

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by Vistaus View Post
    Regressions and new bugs I can understand, but we're talking about SECURITY UPDATES here. In the >11 years I've been using various Linux distros, I've never ever seen a *security* update containing a "drastic UI change".
    You're talking to a bunch of Phoronix readers here. These are mostly people that know nothing about Linux other than what Canonical and RedHat/IBM have been spoon feeding them for years. Many are probably still angry at Canonical for taking their beloved Unity away and think that "security updates" means "make me use Gnome instead of my favorite desktop".


    • #32
      The distribution that forked a text editor (among other applications) because its users are afraid of change is surprised by users not wanting to update.



      • #33
        Originally posted by birdie View Post

        While interesting this could be useful only for geeks/IT pros.
        while it doesn't solve all desktop's problems, it's way easier and idiot proof. I haven't tried the fedora one, but suse one worked fine on my computer- of course as long as you are happy when most of your software is from flatpaks (at least they can be made by the software creators once for all distros instead of maintainers).


        • #34
          Michael, as a beginner & exile from MS, I too avoid updates if I can. Simply, if an update were to break my installation I would be stuffed, If I followed info in the Linux forums I would have to 'tar my ssh with... whatever '. Useless to a beginner. I keep my browser & email profiles on a separate disk and would simply reinstall the OS if it broke following a dodgy update. To miminise that faff I avoid updates.
          Mint is fine for a simple, single installation for a beginner and I found (then) that it worked OOTB, but almost all Linux is hair-tearing once the little guy tries to network at home. There is no upto date, reliable reference source for straightforward instruction as a starting point. Instead there are some 30- 40 websites all giving different instructions. Yes, of course, the 'community' will help when you are stuck, but after wading through those 30-40 sites your installation is totally borked & there is no easy starting point to offer a user good advice.
          Oddly, OpenSuse used to offer a really good GUI for setup (do they still?). But again their updates (& updates engine) would too-often foul a system causing a reinstall.
          I know folks at Linux like their terminal but, like in exams, a multi-choice question (much as in a GUI) offers a limited choice of options and is less of a typing test.
          Stay well.


          • #35
            Originally posted by szymon_g View Post
            is anyone still surprised why MS forces updates on the home version of it's OS?
            No one is surprised by Microsoft's insulting and disrespectful treatment of its users. I also believe that actual security, for the user's sake, is pretty low on the list of reasons they force updates.

            Mint's approach to the issue may be annoying to Mint maintainers, but it is the correct one. If they can tell how far a machine is out of date, then maybe they can push reminders on a suitably infrequent basis. Users who aren't updating out of ignorance may be swayed by a large notice informing them of the fact. Those who aren't updating on purpose might not mind a notice if it only shows every few months, I imagine. The fanciest possible version of that would list for the users which attacks they were leaving themselves open to, exactly.

            Also, devs should be (and probably are) pleased that someone wishes to use their software for so long. It's a complement. 'Thank you for using Mint 17! We no longer support this version and it is missing many security updates and bug fixes. Please help us by upgrading to the supported version so we can better serve you.' would go over better than grousing in a blog or starting to remove user control, I think.


            • #36
              Forced updates is bullsh*t, and what Microsoft and Apple do is horrible. I always turn off automatic updates and do it manually on my own time. People using old version of software? So what. It's their computer.


              • #37
                Originally posted by digitalsin View Post
                Forced updates is bullsh*t, and what Microsoft and Apple do is horrible. I always turn off automatic updates and do it manually on my own time. People using old version of software? So what. It's their computer.
                I think you're overestimating how much the average Joe cares about computer security.

                A lot of people will go to Linux thinking: "Haha! I finally won't have to ever update, no more forced updates!" The problem is that those updates contain security fixes, bug fixes, new encryption schemes, modern features, etc. This is what happened to my sister's mint install. I found out months later that she deactivated updates and never downloaded any since then.

                That's the Achille's heel of Linux. You get freedom, but with it comes the responsability of managing your system.


                • #38
                  Originally posted by skeevy420 View Post
                  I am totally shocked that casuals running CasualOS don't stay up to date.
                  i personally use arch linux so i update frequently. but i don't actually update everyday. i usually do a weekly update as i find this helps weed out bugs. i want the latest stuff (more importantly, latest lutris, mesa, kernel, etc), but i also want to do my best to make sure things don't break. so i keep on the forums, news, etc to see how things are. but this is just my reasoning as to why.

                  with others it could be similar to me, lazyness, or they are just not strict about updating. i can understand not being strict because so many updates change stuff so much and break stuff. i don't see updates as something that improves my experience. i see it as troublesome because "great, what else is gnome killing off, what else is firefox changing yet again for some dumb reason." "i love kernel updates, but are the changes to power management going to regress performance because for some odd reason, the kernel developers who manage it don't do internal testing and it takes phoronix to spot it."

                  on my windows drive i have windows update disabled completely and haven't updated it in a month. i know from a security standpoint that's really bad, but so is microsoft's update quality. their updates are really bad. while ago i got hit by that one that caused super high cpu usage if you have cortana disabled. i felt like they did that on purpose to punish those not wanting their search to be a botnet.

                  if their machine is working then many rightfully feel that its best to not going around changing things. sadly that affects security updates but its a sign that people don't have trust in the system.
                  Last edited by fafreeman; 20 February 2021, 06:04 PM.


                  • #39
                    What a farce.
                    Themselves are shipping an outdated Debian distro.


                    • #40
                      I dont think it is a matter of wanting to or not wanting to update.

                      For a distro that has the default set to not update, a surprising number of people are up to date.

                      They are blaming users for their stupid decisions.