On Thu, 23 Nov 2017 14:47:40 +0100, John wrote in message 
<[email protected]>:

> On 23/11/17 12:28, Arnt Karlsen wrote:
> > ..the kernel guys has this far proven more trustworthy, IME.  
> 
> Number of times unknown third parties have inserted bad code into the 
> linux kernel: 1.

..only once?  Don't forget the runtime backdoor attacks.
 
> Number of times that has happened to systemd: 0

..you forget a lot of us (Devuan) have experienced attack like 
events _by_ systemd.  Which is the greater worry for us here.

> > ..but I agree there's a potential right there too, and I see you
> > systemd guys may have found ways to defeat the kernel guys, or
> > e.g. the Tor project.
> > If you systemd guys turn out to be the good guys, you become
> > part of my back-up plan.  
> 
> I am not a systemd guy.  There's more of my code (i.e. almost none)
> in the Linux kernel than there is in systemd (i.e. none).

..I judge people by the ramifications of their actions. ;o)

..aaand, I believe we agreed I would test your perl script 
rather than have you test my patience. ;o)

> > ..clearly, one of our sides (systemd vs Devuan/Tor/kernel/etc)
> > are on the right side and the other side is on the wrong side.  
> 
> Those "sides" do not exist in the form you claim.

..not formally, agreed, bad guys (too) often do their things 
informally to e.g. evade detection.

>  systemd exists
> only for linux and depends on features written by the "linux guys".

..aye, such naïvite on our part merely warrants a few more backup 
plans prepping to drop Linux for hurd, *bsd Unix etc, it's even 
possible "inside" Debian.

> There is no adversarial relationship between systemd and the kernel.

..ok, tytso and Linus has also vented on their experiences 
with that relationship. ;o) 

> >> Why the comparison with Samba and wine?  You have the source code
> >> for systemd available.  
> > ..aye.  And then we have the good old Ken Thompson style compiler
> > hacks and 33 years of water under the bridge to come up with even
> > better hacks...  
> 
> So you're positing a conspiracy that includes the gcc team as well as 
> systemd.  

..only the latter, but I agree there's a potential of at least
infiltration in the former team.

> If the gcc team was introducing "on trusting trust" style 
> backdoors into gcc why would they attack systemd instead of the
> kernel?

..many ways to skin that cat, I don't neccesarily see attacks 
on systemd as bad, because my own experience with systemd and
pulseaudio is pretty bad.

-- 
..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt Karlsen
...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry...
  Scenarios always come in sets of three: 
  best case, worst case, and just in case.
_______________________________________________
Dng mailing list
[email protected]
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

Reply via email to