• rottingleaf@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    It pretty much does, yes.

    It’s an unnecessary risk that gets solved by Flatpak (plus a bunch of other security advantages)

    … Or Nix/Guix, or any per-user approach to package installation, or AppImages.

    Anyway, I’m not against them completely. For distributing some user applications, and maybe proprietary stuff, they are fine.

    And as it stands, the package installation step is a risky process in any distro I’ve ever seen. You just have to rely that no mistake will ever be made by packagers, nothing will slip past them, and that they manually and thoroughly look through every installation process of every package (which they don’t).

    We-ell, in basic Unix-like terms you can just do a chroot while unpacking, check that no nasty places are being touched, and then rsync to root. I think some PMs already do just that.

    I don’t know, I’m not a security expert. But it is a problem, and a massive one.

    This problem seems inherent to anything Turing-complete.

    • TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      Nix is not simple, and it always seems to fuck up. AppImages have zero security advantages, they’re awful. It doesn’t even have sandboxing.

      We-ell, in basic Unix-like terms you can just do a chroot while unpacking, check that no nasty places are being touched, and then rsync to root. I think some PMs already do just that.

      Lmao. Not only would that not even be effective, but that’s also a ludicrous suggestion for the average user to do for every app they install. What an absurd suggestion.

      Why are you so against having a secure system?