Re:SELinux is unmanageable; just turn it off if it gets in y...
by someguydave on Wednesday April 27, 2022 @10:57AM
(#31180701)
Why would you need to rebuild everywhere? Couldn’t you rebuild once in a trusted place and distribute signed binaries?
Re:SELinux is unmanageable; just turn it off if it gets in y...
by goodpoint on Thursday April 28, 2022 @05:02AM
(#31190232)
Distributions have their fleet of buildbots to do the latter.
Re:SELinux is unmanageable; just turn it off if it gets in y...
by someguydave on Thursday April 28, 2022 @08:42AM
(#31191769)
Exactly! So what difference does it make if there is one patched package or 1,000?
- the distribution to recompile and test all binaries using a vulnerable dependency [x]
- users to download and update all affected binaries
compared to:
- the distribution patching a single package
- users updating that package
Imagine if OpenSSL was statically linked: even the smallest fix would require users to update half of the OS. And that would discourage both maintainer and users from doing regular updates.
[x] And this is assuming that thousands of automated rebuilds are possible. In reality many statically linked languages encourage locking the versions of build dependencies, making it impossible to do just one backport of a patch.