Not discrediting Open Source Software, but nothing is 100% safe.

  • Freeman@lemmy.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    agree. Hell i wouldnt be shocked if some corporations or even nation-state (ie: NSA) actors do this, in a much better/more professional manner to ensure things like…backdoor access.

      • Freeman@lemmy.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeha that was my though. But more a dedicated program to do similar with large FOSS projects.

        They also have hardware/supply chain intercept programs to install back doors in closed source appliances (ie: Cisco firewalls)

        So something similar but dedicated to open source PRs.

        • 018118055@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          At least there have been attempts to subvert open standards for cryptography through the standards process. And occasional suspicious pull requests in critical places - I assume those are done through cut-out proxies so we don’t know who tried.

        • rufus@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Yeah. I think the discussion is kind of nonsensical and a tautology. Nothing in life is 100% safe, if foss or not. And we don’t know what we don’t know. We got a few cases where we know something got intercepted after people tried to do malicious PRs or intercepted network equipment.

          • 018118055@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            I think the more interesting question has long been: what’s (or who is) your threat? Against a sufficiently motivated and resourced adversary, there are few real obstacles. Conversely, some people are just not interesting because there’s little or nothing to gain from attacking them.

            • rufus@discuss.tchncs.de
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Exactly. I just wanted to point out that most of the people here honestly have no idea what they’re talking about.

              If people had read the articles about that ‘study’ if malicious pull requests got accepted… and the aftermath… If they had read the articles how the NSA(?) helped(?!) with the mathematical constants of elliptic curve encryption… How cisco networking equipment got intercepted… If you knew how the internet and freedom worked… You’d know it’s not that easy. Every ‘simple’ answer is just plain wrong. It depends… What is the thread model, what are you able and willing to invest, what are you trying to achieve? Sometimes you don’t even know who’s friend or foe.

              Idk why people want to piss on open source software. It’s a fact that one can have a look at open source software and not at closed source. And don’t tell me nobody does, because i know i do. And millions of github users contribute code and read some code here and there. And i know a few tech blogs who like to check apps and see if they respect privacy and so on. … And that’s not everything as we pointed out earlier. If this helps you, depends on your own goals and thread model.

              • 018118055@sopuli.xyz
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                I really enjoy the discussion here. Refreshing! Most of the time I as a relative non-expert have no idea what I’m doing, but I do read things as much as I can. Otherwise I’m a fallen sysadmin who got a job managing cyber because bills need to be paid.

                Open, closed, it’s all object code in the end which can be examined in disassembly, or the behaviours observed during runtime. Open makes some processes easier in this area. I think the real strengths in this have been beyond security, to enhance cooperation and reuse so we don’t waste time constantly reinventing.

                • rufus@discuss.tchncs.de
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Have you ever had a look at source code or disassembly? The first is like reading a book where somebody gives the computer instructions. It’s kinda readable (if you learned it) and you can figure out with ‘little’ effort what it’s supposed to do and actually doing. Disassembly is like opening the maintenance door of a strange machine and you just see millions of moving cogs and wheels. Sure you can figure out what a single cog is for, or how a part of the machine works. But you’d have to trace thousands of movements by hand, sometimes while running. And it takes you days, sometimes weeks to do that. Even with help of quite sophisticated tools.

                  • 018118055@sopuli.xyz
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    You’re right there is a difference in effort. That said source code can also be obscure if you are trying to hide something. Behavioural analysis at runtime is effective no matter what, but it typically doesn’t tell anything about code coverage.