3 ms·
I think the throw-away-server approach you mention cannot address enough issues or fulfill enough needs; in particular, I'm thinking reproducible builds: https:
by Ambrevar 8y ago
I think the throw-away-server approach you mention cannot address enough issues or fulfill enough needs; in particular, I'm thinking reproducible builds:
https://reproducible-builds.org/ https://reproducible-builds.org/.
Recent years have shown how badly we need to trust our software, and Nix/Guix are two prime examples of projects trying to tackle this issue.
"Just shoot it" servers lack trust and reliability (assuming you are not shooting a reproducible distro of course :p).
- hardwaresofton 8y agoYeah that's definitely true -- throwing your server away is no good if the machine image/setup flow you're using is insecure. Nix/Guix + the long list of distros working on it are all going in the right direction to fix this problem -- but I find it hard to believe that instead of just waiting for Debian reproducible builds (or some other vendor provided option) people will all switch to Nix/Guix. Above the VM layer (@ the sandboxed process i.e. container layer), TUF[0] + Notary[1] + compliant image registries + attestation tools are helping to solve this problem which is nice. [0]: https://theupdateframework.github.io/ https://theupdateframework.github.io/ [1]: https://github.com/theupdateframework/notary https://github.com/theupdateframework/notary
- Ambrevar 8y agoIndeed, many distros tackle the reproducibility issue. But for the better part (and because of history), it can only be an after-thought, some extra layers that tries to fix the existing system. The fundamental difference with Nix and Guix is that it's "reproducibility by design". A much more sustainable approach in my opinion.