News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Remote code execution vulnerability in apt/apt-get. Parent comment

Re:Remote code execution vulnerability in apt/apt-get by loeg on Tuesday January 22, 2019 @01:25PM (#18970785)
It would decrease the number/quantity/capacity of available mirrors. I don't know if that quantity would be significant.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Remote code execution vulnerability in apt/apt-get by Ajedi32 on Tuesday January 22, 2019 @01:41PM (#18970976)
You would lose the ability to do transparent caching which I agree is rather annoying, but I think most environments where that sort of caching occurs (mostly corporate and school networks) also have the means to explicitly configure client machines to use an internal caching mirror.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Remote code execution vulnerability in apt/apt-get by joombaga on Tuesday January 22, 2019 @04:33PM (#18972743)
Those environments tend to MITM https traffic as well. At least the companies I've worked for can.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Remote code execution vulnerability in apt/apt-get by opless on Wednesday January 23, 2019 @07:16AM (#18977576)
Those companies really need to learn what privacy means.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Remote code execution vulnerability in apt/apt-get by opless on Wednesday January 23, 2019 @07:17AM (#18977582)
You could run a caching mirror for such things, such as artifactory for example.
[ Parent | on HN ]