Gentoo Archives: gentoo-hardened

From: Joshua Brindle <method@g.o>
To: gentoo-core@g.o, gentoo-hardened@g.o, gentoo-security@g.o, "Lieber, Kurt" <klieber@g.o>
Subject: [gentoo-hardened] Re: [gentoo-security] Trojan for Gentoo/GNU Linux, proof of concept
Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2003 20:38:15
Message-Id: 20030320T143816Z_B95E00150000@gentoo.org
1 As the founder of gentoo's new security project gentoo-hardened i really feel that I must say something here
2 I happen to disagree with Kurt's line of reasoning here, I have personally been bugging
3 everyone around for an ebuild signing system for months, and it's been spoken about
4 for over 6 months. Many people have talked about this, the pro's and con's, and those
5 of us who have any security needs have pressured the people involved.
6
7 For my hardened project to actually have an effect ebuild signing is mandatory, and the
8 sooner the better, before or after 1.4.
9
10 Having said that, it's about time someone took a stand and posted proof that bad things
11 will happen if ebuild signing doesn't happen. This is exactly the kind of pressure
12 people respond to and maybe something will actually get done about it now.
13
14 The person who posted this is well within his right, and this is how opensource
15 projects often are driven to 'be better'. There has been work on ebuild signing
16 from several people at some point, but the few people who don't like the idea
17 have spent a lot of time discouraging people. This is not acceptable IMO, and
18 I would like to remind everyone involved that it is a very small minority that
19 wants this project blocked. I believe the sentiment among the other devs
20 and especially users is that this _must_ go forward.
21
22 Thank you, please don't flame on this thread anymore, everything has been
23 said that needs to be said, if you feel the need to flame come to irc and talk
24 to me and others in person.
25
26
27
28
29 Joshua Brindle
30
31 >>> Kurt Lieber <klieber@g.o> 03/20/03 12:09PM >>>
32 On Thu, Mar 20, 2003 at 10:02:51AM -0800 or thereabouts, tfandango wrote:
33 > about it. Here's a guy who is concerned about the
34 > security of the Gentoo portage system and posts a
35 > question in the security mailing list about it.
36
37 Asking questions and posting proof-of-concept trojans *without* first
38 asking questions are two different things entirely.
39
40 --kurt
41
42 --
43 gentoo-hardened@g.o mailing list