Dave.Smith@st.com wrote:
On Thu, Apr 24, 2003 at 01:50:11PM +0200, fyrbrds@netscape.net wrote:
Dave.Smith@st.com wrote:
On Thu, Apr 24, 2003 at 12:04:36PM +0200, fyrbrds@netscape.net wrote:
<snip>
There are other issues with this - apart from the extra bandwidth that SuSE's site would experience (since making it easier will cause more people to use it),
Oh my gosh! Ease of use may cause more people to update their system more often thus ensuring that there are less vulnerable systems out there to crack? Heaven knows we don't want that!
That's not what I said. Yes, there is a benefit from having up-to-date machines around the world. However, the fact that it is completely automated concerns me - see comment below.
Dave you do make some good points, but if my grandma can have her computer automatically update itself, that can only be a good thing. Giving extra options for those who want to use them is never a bad thing. If you don't feel secure with it, fine, sit there and click the buttons.
it would also make the automatic update site a prime target for cracking - <snip>
Not really. You can use cron now to rsync/ftp your updates <snip> Also, do we want to admit that MS can offer this service for XP using WINDOZE servers, but linux is too insecure to do it?
Because, of course, M$ has such a good reputation for only putting in features which are secure?
irrelevant.
Perhaps Linux doesn't want a feature because the concept is bad.
linux isn't a person. again, if this will cause less holes for script kiddies to take advantage of, then maybe DoS attacks won't be as effective.
I don't see anyone rushing to add automatically-executing script facilities to the plethora of email clients out there.
That's because everyone except m$ knows this is a bad idea.
Yes, you can do an rsync/ftp-install now. However, this is done on a case-by-case basis, and isn't done that often.
That's because most people (99%) don't know how to set that up.
What worries me is the fact that:
a. It is completely automated, with no user involvement. As a result, I suspect that a large proportion of the people who use it will be of the "configure-and-forget" type - they'll just set it up, and not bother to check it again.
That's still better than letting them NOT configure and STILL forgetting which is what's happening now.
b. The frequency of checking and updating of machines will increase. Therefore, if any crack is found, it will spread fast.
That's why suse signs there packages. It's up to you to use known good servers. What's to say you aren't downloading a tainted package now as you sit there and click through your updates?
c. The service becomes a more public and obvious target for crackers.
It's only as public as the number of people who use SuSE linux.
The reason for concern is simple. If you have a "install-and-forget" automatic update system, and it gets cracked, the modified packages will spread much quicker than they would under a manually-invoked update system. Also, they would spread quickly to systems which might not be checked manually for a long time. The crack would probably be discovered quite quickly, but by this time it would be too late.
Nah. It wouldn't be the end of the world. Besides, I have a little more faith in SuSE security than that.
I'm not sure whether this is a problem with 8.1, but I've never successfully managed an online update. The connection has always timed out.
Yea, but it SHOULD work. If not, your config is wrong. You are probably blocking "ftp-data" on your firewall (high ports). Again Dave, you DO make some good points but I really think your concerns are manageable. If I didn't think SuSE had a good enough grasp of all this to make it work I'd be using Red Hat. (and probably having the same discussion there hmm?) John