4 ms·
The points raised in the article are correct, and I'm much more concerned with the willingness of people to run arbitrary software on their primary computers in
by lokedhs 7y ago
The points raised in the article are correct, and I'm much more concerned with the willingness of people to run arbitrary software on their primary computers in general, than the specific case of piping to sh. I think piping to sh just emphasises how insecure the entire practice is, and arguing against that is analogous to close your eyes to protect yourself from the attacking tiger.
The only system I've worked with that helps you truly deal with this is Qubes OS. Perhaps Fedora Silverblue will achieve this as well, once it comes out of beta.
- Carpetsmoker 7y agoThis article started life as a more general article about security and trust, but decided to post this particular part in its own article. There is a lot to be said about trust in software, but in general I agree that mitigations against untrusted software could be improved. The problem with this is that it's often hard to do this without affecting usability and, more importantly, in practical terms for a lot of people the status quo seems to be "secure enough", even though there are areas for improvement we (as an industry) should work on.
- astrobe_ 7y agoMinor correction: it's "status quo" and I think it should be italicized.