1 |
On Thu, 24 Aug 2017 03:06:13 +0000 (UTC) |
2 |
Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@×××.net> wrote: |
3 |
|
4 |
> nrpe-command-args-SECURITY-HOLE |
5 |
> or just |
6 |
> nrpe-GAPING-SECURITY-HOLE |
7 |
|
8 |
That's probably excessive, if you set that USE flag globally, you |
9 |
deserve what you get. |
10 |
|
11 |
And if you are responsible and you know what you're getting, then you |
12 |
should be allowed to do that ( even though I struggle to understand why |
13 |
) |
14 |
|
15 |
For everything else there are etc/portage/package.use |
16 |
|
17 |
Or maybe it could be a required-use: |
18 |
|
19 |
REQUIRED_USE="nrpe? ( GAPING_SECURITY_HOLE )" |
20 |
|
21 |
Alternatively, you could have a pkg_pretend like: |
22 |
|
23 |
pkg_pretend() { |
24 |
if [[use nrpe && ! has "${CATEGORY}/${PN}" "${GAPING_SECURITY_HOLE}" ]]; then |
25 |
einfo "nrpe feature introduces a security risk where in blah blah" |
26 |
einfo " blah, please read https://wiki.gentoo.org/etc/etc for" |
27 |
einfo " details and how to enable this" |
28 |
die "Security Hole Not Permitted" |
29 |
fi |
30 |
} |
31 |
|
32 |
But I say that only because current REQUIRED_USE feature makes it nigh |
33 |
impossible to understand from a human perspective what that assertion |
34 |
means. |