3 ms·
That's a bit like saying that the defenders of SSH who claimed it's good for security should step up when there's a vulnerability. I'm not quite sure what bene
by iuguy 16y ago
That's a bit like saying that the defenders of SSH who claimed it's good for security should step up when there's a vulnerability.
I'm not quite sure what benefits dynamic linking is supposed to offer by way of security over static, other than when you upgrade a library due to a security weakness you don't have to relink everything.
Static linking would protect against attacks on linkers but dynamic linking offers so many non-security benefits that it's hard to ignore.
Having said that, I always keep a statically compiled busybox on any Linux host I run in case something goes wrong with glibc. Too many bad memories from broken RedHat upgrades from years back.
- nuclear_eclipse 16y ago> Having said that, I always keep a statically compiled busybox on any Linux host I run in case something goes wrong with glibc I just keep a live CD/USB on hand. A lot easier, and it gives the benefit of a graphical boot that can even access the internet to download further fixes.
- iuguy 16y agoDoesn't work too well for a remote VPS though ;) But I agree, live distros have saved my life (or at least my data) on a number of occasions!
- nuclear_eclipse 16y agoIf you botch an upgrade of libc on a remote machine, how does a static busybox help, or do you mean to fix the botched upgrade before rebooting?