Re: [gentoo-user] What's with all these "acct-group" ebuilds recently?

[Jack]

On 2020.06.26 16:03, james wrote:
> On 6/26/20 12:38 PM, Daniel Frey wrote:
>> On 6/20/20 7:04 PM, William Kenworthy wrote:
>>> Thanks for filing the bug.
>>
>> Gah! I forgot about this!
>>
>> I filed a bug now, I hope I made it clear enough. Others can pipe in
>> there with comments if they like.
>>
>> I did indicate the two potential proposals to correct the issue in
>> the bug itself.
>>
>> https://bugs.gentoo.org/729752
>>
>> Dan
>
> BEFORE I contribute to this bug, I'm posting here to see if others
> are or have interest, in my thoughts on this issue and my related
> needs for extreme security, via Gentoo. Below is far from complete,
> but it only provides a very snippets of my (secure) pathway forward
> with Gentoo.
>
> Interesting thread, thanks to all contributors. I'd like to add 'my
> selfish' interest, as they also be espoused by other, more focused,
> gentoo users.
>
> INTRO:
>
> I rarely build gentoo systems, for many reasons, that are not pretty
> singularly focused. It drastically reduces security, performance and
> upgrade issues. For me, the days of a any system, having groups or
> users, are in the history books of very bad ideas. uP are so cheap
> and less than $100, gets you a very 'bad ass' computer (Rasp. Pi 4+)
> 16 G map-able ram. Furthermore, SOON, usb_4 devices are going to
> obsolete the entire concept of a 'hard drive'; hence the death (my
> prediction) of groups and users on multi-USER systems, albeit slowly.
>
> Multi-function, Multi-tasking, and light weight, focused transient
> clusters are the future. YMMV.
>
>
> So solving a problem, that was real and big, decades ago, fails to
> look at the future. For me, Gentoo is future proof. I suggest a well
> documented pathway forward; totally without the concept of groups and
> users, on a typical, highly secure system. Which is now the baseline
> for real systems, particularly with a ipv4 or ipv6 static ip, that
> provide focused and highly restricted functionalities. CA servers are
> going private, as the public and root CA servers, are suspect, at
> best, as to being pristinely secure. Yes boys and girls most
> Certificate Authorities are HACK! Even the main root CAs.
>
> The F. Feds are the original culprits, but now it is a feeding
> frenzy. The planet is now hacked, and groups and users concepts are
> the past. imho! Danger Will Robinson Danger!
>
> So can some of the smarter (gentoo) folks illuminate how to totally
> avoid groups and users, except for the minimum required, application
> specific? For example like serial line tools, or outline a set of
> tweaks/setting to avoid these altogether?
>
> I build embedded G. systems. I build single purpose G systems. I
> build security G. systems (often with the ethernet, in only listen
> mode. I build G. Firewalls.
> I build G. highly restricted/filtered servers. NONE of those need
> users or groups. And if they do, I can obfuscate codes to provide
> that need, to where filters and focused software gets what it needs
> to provide functions.
>
> Yep, I'm moving to a total 'State_Machine_design' for critical
> services. Strip out every thing else.....
>
> Am I alone, or have/are others contemplating such high secure
> pathways? I'd be fantastic to find a kernel hacker that is on the
> pathway of extreme minimization too; private email is fine; if that
> is in your wheel_house.
>
>
> curiously alone?,
> James
While you may not be alone, I do believe you're in a rather small  
group.  There are probably more who are interested in watching it  
progress than who can actually participate and contribute.  And while  
what you propose may well be part of the future, and it may even be a  
large part of it, it won't be so anywhere near soon enough to avoid the  
need to continue to improve current systems, even if the improvements  
are only usability related, and not directly related to security.  This  
current issue is nothing more than an annoyance, but it's a major  
annoyance for many Gentoo users, possibly more-so for the more casual  
users.  (Is "casual Gentoo user" an oxymoron?)  As the bug proposes,  
there are ways of solving it without decreasing security.

Jack