Ubuntu 24.10 To Enhance Snap Permissions Handling

[Espionage724]

you are literally insane if you expect ordinary users should use a rolling distro.

the only people who can use arch savely are the valve steam deck users who use version numbered images with immutable filesystem linux distro images...

it is save because the images and update images have version numbes and are tested very well and its immutable means no one can manipulate anything on such a system.

but go and tell unskilled people to use rolling distro this will make sure they use microsoft and apple products in the future because the rolling distro will break their neck.

The only rolling-release distro I'd recommend to anyone is openSUSE Tumbleweed, and that's packaged in mainstream format (several DEs, desktop/server), doesn't play politics with packages in default repos (intel-media-driver and steam ez), and also isn't a fork

I doubt I'd ever need to recommend Arch; it's likely anyone who might benefit from that as a recommendation has probably already heard of it or tried it

[SebastianB]

I would also caution people that care about stable systems to use forks. Nearly always forks have a tiny team behind it, yes they might work great now, but at any time a crucial member might get burnout, hit by a bus or a small company goes belly up or changes their policies. In debian, fedora, opensuse, ubuntu or arch people are replacable. There is a graveyard of at one point popular linux distribution forks that went down hard.

CentOS would be one such example. Horrible situation all around. You know what you get with debian, its reliable and predictable. Has been for almost 30 years really. Arch I don't trust, it has a track record of breaking on updates, especially with big changes were other distributions migrated you gracefully. It's fine if your on site to fix things anyway, not fine otherwise.

[qarium]

Why use Fedora if you believe that it can be so easily compromised?

https://www.gentoo.org/downloads/

You can download a liveGUI usb image of Gentoo.

gentoo does not get the security patches faster... last time i tried to install gentoo i discovered that gentoo use out to date kernel and out to date software stack... fedora is faster updated and closer to upstream than gentoo.

there are of course szenarios who gentoo helps for example if you want to project yourself against government tojan horse and by this you are forced to only use software you compile the source code yourself...

[qarium]

I would also caution people that care about stable systems to use forks. Nearly always forks have a tiny team behind it, yes they might work great now, but at any time a crucial member might get burnout, hit by a bus or a small company goes belly up or changes their policies. In debian, fedora, opensuse, ubuntu or arch people are replacable. There is a graveyard of at one point popular linux distribution forks that went down hard.
CentOS would be one such example. Horrible situation all around. You know what you get with debian, its reliable and predictable. Has been for almost 30 years really. Arch I don't trust, it has a track record of breaking on updates, especially with big changes were other distributions migrated you gracefully. It's fine if your on site to fix things anyway, not fine otherwise.

i fully agree with you. i just said my opinion is that the only single bad choice you can do is go with ubuntu.

all other options you said like debian and fedora and opensuse they are all just fine. ubuntu is the only rotten apple.

also keep in mind Pop os is just a hack for people who want or need ubuntu but are unhappy with snaps and so one.

yes its wise to not trust Arch... its really only useable for people like valve who produce versioned immutable images for devices like steam deck but then you do not use any of the rolling aspect of the distro,

[sophisticles]

there are of course szenarios who gentoo helps for example if you want to project yourself against government tojan horse and by this you are forced to only use software you compile the source code yourself...

You still don't get it, if a government agency wanted to include a trojan they wouldn't include it in the binary they would include it in the source code, so that even people compiling it themselves would be infected.

Even better, include it in the compiler, so that even a source edit of the distro would not find it.

Linux security is a myth, it's so easy to compromise it that security is the least reason to use it.

[qarium]

You still don't get it, if a government agency wanted to include a trojan they wouldn't include it in the binary they would include it in the source code, so that even people compiling it themselves would be infected.

man you are really a con artist if the government puts a trojan in the source code you then manage and compile well why not write the government trojan horse yourself and then compile it ?

how exactly does this even work with a public GIT history ? because you of course do not download and compile source code from some random sources you use trusted sources with good git history record.

and we have seen failing supply chain attacks on linux with xz who the attacker failed to hide it and the GIT records shows very well what he did.

Even better, include it in the compiler, so that even a source edit of the distro would not find it.

con artist again no one is using a untrusted compiler without close well audited GIT history.

Linux security is a myth, it's so easy to compromise it that security is the least reason to use it.

well you do not understand that people use trusted compilers with well managed GIT history and multiple independent audits.

to hide a government trojan there would be your biggest con artist trick ever.

but why do it this way if the government can only order any mainboard company to supply a BIOS/UEFI/microcode update camouflaged as security update with a trojan inside.

99,99% of all computers have closed source BIOS/UEFI ...

there is a reason why evil marxist state/governments like the german BRD wichhunt linux open source developers like the phoronix.com forum user rene:

https://youtu.be/FIEwcTKUFCA?si=vFPTgrdlw84Qch8F

[qarium]

https://youtu.be/KIL3Ka3BS0o

honestly this video cause cognitive dissonance in my brain
to quote trump: "I am not talking about the neo n a z i s and white nationalists because they should be condemned totally."
what exactly did these people do ?
just keep in mind its about people who demonstrated agains the removal of historical statues
so trump think all people who demonstrate against the removal of historical statues are fine people as long as they are not neo n a z i s and white nationalists even... keep this in mind they do nothing means they do not break US law at all so even if they do not break US law trump say they need to be condemned totally and at all time of course
the problem we have with people like billionares like Donald Trump and Elon Musk is that they should not be in power at no time it should simple be against the law for bilionares to ever come in power. or just like a lottery parlament make it statistically impossible for billionares to ever come into power
but face it in USA rich people can buy and corrupt everything even a US election give me 1 trilliion dollar and i buy everyone and corrupt fully legal everyone to legally buy a election just watch TV series house of cards.
you do not even break the law by this this is fully legal in USA and also fully legal in germany
the joke is with 1 trillion dollar you do not even need to rig the election at election time you can just wait until anyone just any random people is elected and then you buy them after the election and you just do this every 4 years fully legal
sadly the us political system is fully corrupted
you can vote for no one in USA on the Democrate side you can vote a complete insane person kamilla harris and on the other side you can vote a person who claims humans who did not break any law need to be condemned totally
just think logically just 1 time... donald trump literally said you need to condemn people totally who did not break any law they just have different world view than you
i did read/listen that people say donald trump/elon musk are centrists this is reason why they permanently need to condemn the right-wing/right-radical or right-extremist side all the time
but think logically again in a system with only 2 parties how exactly can a centrist even exist ?
my point of view is that in a 2 party system a centrist does not exist
it is something very different and i will explain it to you
in a 2 party system one party is always the left-wing side (even if they want to be centrist people this claim does not matter at all and i will explain in detail why)
the other party in a 2 party system is always the the right-wing party no matter how they claim that they are centrist
in the past i did explain that in democratic republic like usa and germany all democratic parties are left-wing and not a single party of them is right-wing i did explain to you this in detail the reason is that the right-wing people do not want democracy they want monarchy
i told you what is republican in usa is AFD in germany both are not right wing parties they are both also left-wing party
i told you both side left-wing and AFD in germany and left-wing and Republicans in usa want immigration the only different one side want unlawfull immigration and the other side want lawfull immigration so the so called right-wing parties like republican and AFD are not right-wing at all they are to be 100% precise: law-and-order left wing parties
now i ask you is a law-and-order left wing party a centrist party ?
of course not
donald trump and elon musk claim to be centrists and they to make sure you believe this condemn right-wing standpoints at any time and in any form and totally.
but now i will explain to you why he is not centrist
in a 2 party system i told you centrist does not exist one side is always right wing the other side is always left wing but the poliitical orientation of both parties can shift
they both have competition who is MORE left-wing i told you the only difference is unlawfull-left-wing party on one side and law-and-order-left-wing on the other side but both side try to be left-wing as possible this is so because left-wing means """Democratically""" and any form of right-wing would mean Monarchy (the explicit important detail distinction is collectivism vs individual ideology democracy is a collectivist ideology and a king or queen is always a individual thats the reason why monarchy is a individual ideology. )
if you are a individual and you think as a individual you can not be a democrat in any shape and form because democraty is a collectivist ideology and a individual can only be monarchist.
he can only be monarchist because remember in the middle ages with feud law all people are individuals and all people have the same rights and a collective to dictate a individual what he has to do and to force a individual for example into compulsory school system is a impossibility.
see a monarchist would be for the individual and against collectivism and automatically would be against a forced collectivist compulsory school system.
you see Donald Trump is not a centrist he can not be a centrist all he can be is a law-and-order-left-wing-democrat.
donald trump in a democratic election can not be anything else.
democracy means left-wing and democratic elected means the collectivist ideology has chosen you as their leader.
and this also means he is enemy of every individual
because a individual can only be monarchist
only in monarchy the individual is valued. because the king is a individual and not a collectivist.

this election in the USA is really the fight of the left against the more left.
2 left wing leaders... kamilla harris and donald trump have a dispute who is more left-wing and who should lead the collective into collectivist nightmare dystopia future.
they created a political system who only left-wing people have a representation and any right-wing person in any shape or form has no place what so ever.

https://youtu.be/m01XFanxAoM?si=ArQixYWaPGLDATzh

think about this in the view of individualist vs collectivist
she as a individualist person did use her own money and skill and effort to improve the ship for everyone on board the ship and nearly everyone was happy about this
now the evil collectivists could not stand this improvement and punished her hard
but you see the collectivists did know they are wrong 100% and 6 month later nearly every ship did get starlink internet
my opinion is she was always right and in a monarchy she would had get a promotion to greatly improve the ship and fleet.
but people who should get a promotion in monarchy are always punished in democracy and people who do absolutely nothing in democracy always have a save bed and never get punished for doing something wrong.
i see this everywhere in the so called democratic republic people who do nothing because this is the only way to not get punished in this fake law system.

[Espionage724]

Linux security is a myth, it's so easy to compromise it that security is the least reason to use it.

Just send a magic wake packet and compromise payload on any bootloaders that accept it, no OS required Mostly every driver has WOL enabled by-default for some reason.

[krzyzowiec]

exactly... and if security updates of systema and software is no problem with APT/.deb and .rpm and flatpak but near to impossible with snap then well snap is very bad.

i honestly do not unterstand why people use ubuntu at all it only cause problems.

Why would it be impossible to do security updates with snap?

Personally I use Ubuntu because I love how they use desktop optimizations by default, have sensible defaults, and yet are forward thinking.

I'm very excited about the future Ubuntu Core Desktop. I've wanted an immutable desktop image for a while, and I like Canonical's design.