Re:Show HN: Server installs simplified (and built from source)
by lnguyen on Saturday May 05, 2012 @11:06PM
(#3934020)
There's a fair amount of risk in everything: Do you trust the admins of you hosting provider? Are you sure about the source code or binaries for all the pieces of your runtime stack? Did you audit every piece of your own source code for security issues?
But right now I'm not asking people to drop everything and use rayburst to set up their production servers no questions asked. Just to try it out and see if it does what they need.
If someone then decides to use it for production setup, we can talk about how to guarantee security and stability in the configuration for their setup. BTW this is why you enter into contracts, pay for services, etc.
Re:Show HN: Server installs simplified (and built from source)
by fruchtose on Sunday May 06, 2012 @12:20AM
(#3934163)
There's elevated risk because the downloadable scripts use `sudo`. I think the concept is great, but asking users to allow `sudo` permissions to a foreign script site unseen is naturally bound to raise suspicisons. That said, I am thrilled that the site is protected by HTTPS, especially the install scripts themselves. You have obviously put a lot of thought into this product, and I see several ways to monetize it. The only problem for me is that I'm currently using a (cheap) webhost with restricted accounts and I cannot use `sudo`, but in the future I'll come back to see how your site performs.
Re:Show HN: Server installs simplified (and built from source)
by lnguyen on Sunday May 06, 2012 @12:53AM
(#3934207)
"sudo" is unavoidable since the installs are designed to go into /usr/local. The other option would be to require you to run as root/privileged which leads to the same issue of running an unseen script and just adds an extra step to the process.
It's possible to design the process to allow installs into other locations but that would require a fair bit of extra configuration (picking up the libraries, etc.) and testing. And you'd lose the service startups. It's something to think about if there's enough demand (and probably required for supporting Macs)
I'm not trying to bust your chops -- I think this is a great implementation that is geared for developers who might not have sysadmin experience -- I'm just saying that there seems to be a fair amount of risk opening up and running remote bash scripts based off of anything on the internet; chef and other system configuration tools require you to implicitly trust your sources, because they can change at any time. What happens if your system gets broken into? What happens when the service no longer exists? As I've mentioned, this would be a great service for developers who don't want to mess with managing their own test and development environments, but, I'd never push this to a production server.