3 ms·
hiding packages you have installed from your ISP/NSA/etc. this discussion comes up time and time again (in rpm, apt et al). the consensus is: if you need that
by ggg2 7y ago
hiding packages you have installed from your ISP/NSA/etc.
this discussion comes up time and time again (in rpm, apt et al). the consensus is: if you need that extra feature, manually download sensitive packages via ssl or something. everyone else (with nothing to hide, heh) keeps benefiting from a global cache of unencrypted transport of (mostly) open source data.
- pwnna 7y agoDoes that help? I thought the package size is quite revealing.
- isostatic 7y agoIn some cases (although the server could presumably send some random length data headers if that's a concern), but if you download multiple packages on a single connection can it still be tracked?
- vetinari 7y agoThe sizes of all packages are a known information. So if someone is dedicated enough to track your downloaded packages, figuring out which ones were transferred with a single connection is relatively simple integer programming task. If you want to really hide what you are installing, make a local mirror of the entire repo and then pick and choose from that.
- scheveningen 7y agoI thought _pmf_ was describing packages that he authored, and certainly if the contents of them are confidential, they would be in a private repository. I don't think that the RPMs that I have created in my internal repository and deploy to my field systems are a 'known information' to anyone outside of my organization. If they are, I'm in serious trouble. I think a more realistic use case for package-level encryption is deploying RPMs that have secrets in them (either keys/creds in configuration or trade secrets in application logic). Ideally of course we should encapsulate these such that they aren't deployed to field/embedded devices but in embedded there certainly may be some use-cases and requirements that those of us used to working in data center and cloud computing aren't immediately thinking of.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- BuildTheRobots 7y agoTransport security & confidentiality makes sense (though at first I was trying to work out how an encrypted yum package would work). Yum with CentOS 6 and above does support SSL for mirror sites and a handful of global mirrors also support it (HEG being one). I suppose there's a slight race condition (eg how do I update the CA-Certificates bundle when I need the new CA-Certificates bundle to connect to the mirror site to download the update), however I tend to agree there should be some privacy as default.
- ses1984 7y agoYou can cache things that are encrypted too, or do you think drm protected Netflix videos are all streamed from the origin? Yeah it's a bit more complicated...
- forgottenpass 7y agoIf by "origin" you mean "box Netflix has root on"... yes, I do think that?
- rhinoceraptor 7y agoNetflix runs a fleet of their own CDN boxes, that they put in ISP data centers.
- solatic 7y agoAs pwnna pointed out, package size gives you away. The real way to protect against this, if it's genuinely part of your threat model, is to maintain a complete local mirror: you can't tell what is installed and at what versions if you simply download everything. And if it's actually part of your threat model, then you likely have a large enough install base that you need a local mirror for performance/non-security reasons anyway. So it's really a non-issue.
- eeZah7Ux 7y agoThe combination of IP addresses and package sizes is way too revealing. That's why APT supports Tor as a transport protocol.