4 ms·

Let me tell you about my most catastrophic experiences with sysv... I've had quite a few. Anecdotal evidence is useless. What you're suggesting is basically s

by lima 9y ago

Let me tell you about my most catastrophic experiences with sysv... I've had quite a few. Anecdotal evidence is useless. What you're suggesting is basically spreading FUD. Your article didn't point out a single actual issue with systemd. I run large scale VM infrastructure on a systemd distro (RHEL, in particular) and I've yet to encounter a single issue that was caused by systemd or, for that matter, any issue with systemd that wasn't easily resolved.

fao_ 9y ago
> What you're suggesting is basically spreading FUD. Your article didn't point out a single actual issue with systemd. That doesn't mean that there aren't any. Also, FUD (as I understand it) is people spreading unfounded rumours, not people documenting their own experiences and problems with a piece of software. The intent is incomparable. If you are actually interested in tangible structural flaws in systemd, look no further: https://suckless.org/sucks/systemd https://suckless.org/sucks/systemd https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/07/28/black_hat_pwnie_awards/ https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/07/28/black_hat_pwnie_awa... Also, see how Poettering handled this zero day (Which grants root to any user with a numeral): https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/6237 https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/6237 HINT: He doesn't think it's a bug... The fact that this even fucking exists in the first damn place: https://latesthackingnews.com/2017/06/29/a-systemd-vulnerability-allows-attackers-hack-linux-machines-via-malicious-dns-response/ https://latesthackingnews.com/2017/06/29/a-systemd-vulnerabi... See also: http://without-systemd.org/wiki/index.php/Arguments_against_systemd http://without-systemd.org/wiki/index.php/Arguments_against_...
- bennofs 9y ago
  > Which grants root to any user with a numeral This formulation may be misunderstood. The bug did not grant users root rights, it ignored the user= setting on a service if the service was intended to run as a user stating with a numeral. So you already needed to be root to create a service. The bug allows a service to run with more permissions than intended though.

by lima 9y ago

fao_ 9y ago

> What you're suggesting is basically spreading FUD. Your article didn't point out a single actual issue with systemd. That doesn't mean that there aren't any. Also, FUD (as I understand it) is people spreading unfounded rumours, not people documenting their own experiences and problems with a piece of software. The intent is incomparable. If you are actually interested in tangible structural flaws in systemd, look no further: https://suckless.org/sucks/systemd https://suckless.org/sucks/systemd https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/07/28/black_hat_pwnie_awards/ https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/07/28/black_hat_pwnie_awa... Also, see how Poettering handled this zero day (Which grants root to any user with a numeral): https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/6237 https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/6237 HINT: He doesn't think it's a bug... The fact that this even fucking exists in the first damn place: https://latesthackingnews.com/2017/06/29/a-systemd-vulnerability-allows-attackers-hack-linux-machines-via-malicious-dns-response/ https://latesthackingnews.com/2017/06/29/a-systemd-vulnerabi... See also: http://without-systemd.org/wiki/index.php/Arguments_against_systemd http://without-systemd.org/wiki/index.php/Arguments_against_...

bennofs 9y ago
> Which grants root to any user with a numeral This formulation may be misunderstood. The bug did not grant users root rights, it ignored the user= setting on a service if the service was intended to run as a user stating with a numeral. So you already needed to be root to create a service. The bug allows a service to run with more permissions than intended though.