News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on System Down: A systemd-journald exploit. Parent comment

Re:System Down: A systemd-journald exploit by theamk on Thursday January 10, 2019 @02:17PM (#18877026)
For me, "decoupling" means running separate processes with well-defined interfaces. Systemd does exactly that -- it has many separate processes, each with well-defined interfaces. For example, systemd-timesyncd can be run on any machine with dbus, and does not require systemd init at all.

The only "merging" systemd does is that it puts multiple binaries into one package, other than that they are completely separate. While it is annoying waste of space, there is no reason to suspect "coupling".

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:System Down: A systemd-journald exploit by geggam on Friday January 11, 2019 @02:01PM (#18885913)
Your idea of well defined and mine are somewhat different :)
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:System Down: A systemd-journald exploit by theamk on Friday January 11, 2019 @03:14PM (#18886519)
Can you be more specific, please? Like which interface is not well defined?

I find the fact that systemd internals are connected via the same mechanisms as non-systemd apps (units, sockets and so on) very nice, especially compared to sysvinit or upstart. Have you tried to patch network detection in upstart? Not an easy job. And upstart's manpages are less than useful, compared to systemd's.

Above in the other threads someone said "journal". This is a good point, except there is --log-target=kmsg option which disables that interface and switches it to good old kmsg which anyone can parse and read.

Any others?

[ Parent | on HN ]