Re: [gentoo-dev] zoom concerns

2020-04-07 Thread Kent Fredric
On Tue, 07 Apr 2020 14:44:04 +0100 Roy Bamford wrote: > Gentoo must not single out any package for special treatment. Indeed. Cases like this just demonstrate that something about the way we do things is somehow inadequate. The idea that "what we have works" is something we get away with, becau

Re: [gentoo-dev] zoom concerns

2020-04-07 Thread Kent Fredric
On Tue, 7 Apr 2020 12:47:33 +0200 Thomas Deutschmann wrote: > Sure, that could have banal reasons like "No one audited the Linux > version yet". But in security you don't issue warnings if you aren't > sure. Because if you make false statements people will no longer trust > you. But trust is ever

[gentoo-dev] The importance of having an ebuild

2020-04-07 Thread Samuel Bernardo
Dear all, I start to subscribe all the messages that have been exchanged2 and would like to start to cite a very important sentence mentioned by Kent in zoom thread, that concerns me: On 4/7/20 7:23 AM, Kent Fredric wrote: > But utlimately, this is not a technology problem: Its a staffing problem

Re: [gentoo-dev] zoom concerns

2020-04-07 Thread Roy Bamford
On 2020.04.07 09:48, Ulrich Mueller wrote: > > On Tue, 07 Apr 2020, Samuel Bernardo wrote: > > > No assurance is also a level that takes place in the lower ranking > > level. If someone needs to use zoom because they are demanded by > their > > boss I think that would be even more useful to kn

Re: [gentoo-dev] zoom concerns

2020-04-07 Thread Thomas Deutschmann
On 2020-04-07 12:35, Alessandro Barbieri wrote: > What about moving all of these binary-only packages in an official overlay > (made for the scope) or in GURU? And which problem is that going to solve? Do we want to tell world, "Look! Gentoo is the most secure distribution! We have zero vulnerabi

Re: [gentoo-dev] zoom concerns

2020-04-07 Thread Thomas Deutschmann
On 2020-04-07 10:48, Ulrich Mueller wrote: > We could add a README.gentoo file with our caveats. It won't be perfect, > but maybe better than nothing. (And certainly better than displaying a > warning on every upgrade, which will eventually annoy people [1].) I am strictly against something like t

Re: [gentoo-dev] zoom concerns

2020-04-07 Thread Alessandro Barbieri
What about moving all of these binary-only packages in an official overlay (made for the scope) or in GURU? Il Gio 2 Apr 2020, 02:48 Rich Freeman ha scritto: > On Wed, Apr 1, 2020 at 8:18 PM Alessandro Barbieri > wrote: > > > > I have concerns about the inclusion of zoom in ::gentoo. For me it'

Re: [gentoo-dev] zoom concerns

2020-04-07 Thread Ulrich Mueller
> On Tue, 07 Apr 2020, Samuel Bernardo wrote: > No assurance is also a level that takes place in the lower ranking > level. If someone needs to use zoom because they are demanded by their > boss I think that would be even more useful to know that it is possible > to install zoom in Gentoo and