Originally posted by Rubble Monkey
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
How To Use Systemd For Application Sandboxing & How To Easily Crash Systemd
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by curaga View Post...this is exactly the kind of thing I, and a few million others, foresaw when systemd first appeared. Ahem. Trying hard to suppress a told-you-so.
And this is not really a bug, because the crash happened due to an assert. Asserts get removed on release code (because it's some kind of primitive unit test). For some reasons some distributions didn't remove it. This is why some could reproduce the crash and some not.
- Likes 2
Comment
-
Originally posted by Rubble Monkey View PostI like that he gave the whole blog a good look, but what I didn't like (which for some reason applies to most systemd defenders) is that he calls "missing the bigger picture" "throwing a tantrum". He even admits that valid points were brought up (which is admirable to do for something he supports that much) but he still tries to make the author look childish and discredit him instead of just correcting him!
- Likes 3
Comment
-
Originally posted by curaga View Post...this is exactly the kind of thing I, and a few million others, foresaw when systemd first appeared. Ahem. Trying hard to suppress a told-you-so.
Meanwhile, crashing scripts hard or using them to privilege-escalate is still a child's play (as the latest mysql vulnerability demonstrated).
- Likes 2
Comment
-
Originally posted by Rubble Monkey View Post
I like that he gave the whole blog a good look, but what I didn't like (which for some reason applies to most systemd defenders) is that he calls "missing the bigger picture" "throwing a tantrum". He even admits that valid points were brought up (which is admirable to do for something he supports that much) but he still tries to make the author look childish and discredit him instead of just correcting him!
Comment
-
Originally posted by Rubble Monkey View PostI like that he gave the whole blog a good look, but what I didn't like (which for some reason applies to most systemd defenders) is that he calls "missing the bigger picture" "throwing a tantrum". He even admits that valid points were brought up (which is admirable to do for something he supports that much) but he still tries to make the author look childish and discredit him instead of just correcting him!
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by Rubble Monkey View Post
I like that he gave the whole blog a good look, but what I didn't like (which for some reason applies to most systemd defenders) is that he calls "missing the bigger picture" "throwing a tantrum". He even admits that valid points were brought up (which is admirable to do for something he supports that much) but he still tries to make the author look childish and discredit him instead of just correcting him!If Ayer cares as much about modular design and replaceable components as he claims, then he should be cheering on at least some of systemd’s work in making security more usable and major subsystems more modular. Instead, he’s cherry-picking what he considers negatives (some of which, I admit, are legitimate criticisms) and then calling for a complete replacement of systemd. This is what turns a critique into a tantrum.
- Likes 2
Comment
Comment