4 ms·

Yeah telling us to blindly run a shell script is...a quirky design choice. At least it doesn't tell you to run it with sudo like I've seen some other ones do, a

Yeah telling us to blindly run a shell script is...a quirky design choice. At least it doesn't tell you to run it with sudo like I've seen some other ones do, and the shell script itself is sanely commented.

jacobscott 11y ago
If the script source is on github and isn't run under sudo, is there a meaningful difference between curl | sh and apt-get install from a PPA, gem/pip install, etc?
- whorleater 11y ago
  Meaningful? In most cases no, but since we're already talking about security, curl'ing the shell script from github exposes you to another attack vector, like MITM'ing the script.
  - jacobscott 11y ago
    The software has to be distributed somehow, right? Probably over https? What makes curl more susceptible to MITM than apt-get/pip/gem/etc? I don't particularly like curl | sh either, but without sudo, I'm not sure how much it /really/ differs, security wise, from other options. Edit: real package managers have improved features compared to curl, as outlined in another branch of the comments.
  - dchanm 11y ago
    If you want to be extra cautious you can verify that the script hasn't changed with our release key https://patchworksecurity.com/releases.txt https://patchworksecurity.com/releases.txt The latest release (2.0.0) has been signed by my key 0x85C64E20
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
yaworsk 11y ago
Looked at the site and read the comments which made me think about the HN post yesterday about hiding vulnerabilities in plain site (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10889721 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10889721). Like your idea though.
- dchanm 11y ago
  Hi yaworsk, We're working on improving our API documentation. You can develop against our API and not use the supplied client. https://patchworksecurity.com/docs/ https://patchworksecurity.com/docs/
  - yaworsk 11y ago
    Oh nice! that's a great idea, thanks for sharing

jacobscott 11y ago

If the script source is on github and isn't run under sudo, is there a meaningful difference between curl | sh and apt-get install from a PPA, gem/pip install, etc?

whorleater 11y ago
Meaningful? In most cases no, but since we're already talking about security, curl'ing the shell script from github exposes you to another attack vector, like MITM'ing the script.
- jacobscott 11y ago
  The software has to be distributed somehow, right? Probably over https? What makes curl more susceptible to MITM than apt-get/pip/gem/etc? I don't particularly like curl | sh either, but without sudo, I'm not sure how much it /really/ differs, security wise, from other options. Edit: real package managers have improved features compared to curl, as outlined in another branch of the comments.
- dchanm 11y ago
  If you want to be extra cautious you can verify that the script hasn't changed with our release key https://patchworksecurity.com/releases.txt https://patchworksecurity.com/releases.txt The latest release (2.0.0) has been signed by my key 0x85C64E20

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

yaworsk 11y ago

Looked at the site and read the comments which made me think about the HN post yesterday about hiding vulnerabilities in plain site (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10889721 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10889721). Like your idea though.

dchanm 11y ago
Hi yaworsk, We're working on improving our API documentation. You can develop against our API and not use the supplied client. https://patchworksecurity.com/docs/ https://patchworksecurity.com/docs/
- yaworsk 11y ago
  Oh nice! that's a great idea, thanks for sharing