News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Nixos-unstable’s ISO_minimal.x86_64-Linux is 100% reprodu... by zamadatix on Sunday June 20, 2021 @08:24PM (#27575050)
Reproducible builds solve many security problems for sure but but the problems it solves in no way help you if the maintainer is not alturistic or bad at security as originally stated. It helps tell you if the maintainers toolchain wasn't compromised and it does it AFTER the payload is delivered and you built your own payload not made by the maintainer anyways. It doesn't even tell you the transport/hosting wasn't compromised unless you can somehow get a copy of the source used to compile not made by the maintainer directly as the transport/hosting for the source they maintain could be as well.

Solving that singular attack vector in the delivery chain does nothing for solving the need to trust the altruism and self interest of maintainers. A good thing™? Absolutely, along with the other non security benefits, but has nothing to do with needing to trust maintainers or be in the niche that reviews source code when automatic updates come along as originally sold.

Re:Nixos-unstable’s ISO_minimal.x86_64-Linux is 100% reprodu... by pabs3 on Sunday June 20, 2021 @09:59PM (#27575567)
There are other solutions to the problem of trusting maintainers; namely incremental distributed code review. The Rust folks are working on that:

https://github.com/crev-dev/

Re:Nixos-unstable’s ISO_minimal.x86_64-Linux is 100% reprodu... by bigiain on Monday June 21, 2021 @08:36PM (#27586511)
> but the problems it solves in no way help you if the maintainer is not alturistic or bad at security as originally stated.

That same edgewise applies to your bank too. Pinned TLS certs or pre shared keys might help against "BadGuys(tm)", but you're still screwed if your bank decides to keep your money. (s/bank/online crypto wallet/ for real world examples there...)