• 0 Posts
  • 27 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 24th, 2023

help-circle




  • Yes, but…

    The build environment was not clean to start, which is why a contributor is working to correct that.

    You could also have the build scripts that run on GitHub pull the binary releases directly from their original release locations at build time, vs a file that an individual can modify in the source tree. This isn’t as good as building from source, but it’s better than nothing.


  • You:

    solve a relatively minor security issue.

    Wikipedia:

    In February 2024, a malicious backdoor was introduced to the Linux build of the xz utility within the liblzma library in versions 5.6.0 and 5.6.1 by an account using the name “Jia Tan”.[b][4] The backdoor gives an attacker who possesses a specific Ed448 private key remote code execution through OpenSSH on the affected Linux system. The issue has been given the Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures number CVE-2024-3094 and has been assigned a CVSS score of 10.0, the highest possible score.[5]

    Binary supply-chain attacks are not “minor security issues”. There is a reason many companies will not allow admins to use Ventoy.

    I like Ventoy, it’s a fantastic project. I like that the author is transparent about where they won’t be spending their time. You can like a project, and recognize it’s flaws at the same time.

    A contributor building a PR to solve the build concerns is not a bad thing, it’s to be celebrated. Even a short-term solution of having the build script pull the binaries from a release and checksum them would alleviate a lot of that concern. And the Windows vs Nix item would be alleviated by the GitHub build ENV. Binary releases isn’t the problem, it’s binary in the source. This is about audits and traceability more than the build itself.

    Not having a security first posture on these kinds of attacks is how the xz event happened, and I would hate to see that happen to Ventoy. I look forward to contributors helping the author out.



  • The only true solution to this is cryptographically signed identities.

    One method is identity verification tied to a public key, which can be done with claims aggregation (I am X on GitHub, and Y on LinkedIn, and Z on my national ID, etc), but this removes anonymous use.

    Another is a central resource to verify a user’s key is a real human, where only one entity controls the identity verification. While this allows pseudo anonymous use, it also requires everyone to trust one individilual entity, and that has other risks.

    We’ve been discussing this with FedID a lot, lately.







  • You must be man. 😀

    Me too, but I also sew, so: Different types of clothing fit women differently based on size. And I don’t mean body shape fit just being slightly different. A “small shirt” can have a million different lengths which could reveal midriff based on bust or Shoulder size. This is impacted by curves but is a total dofferent measurement. And this can happen with any gender, but statistically more so for women.

    And wait until you realize that people are sized different in different countries other than America.

    The best solution would be to remove sizes altogether and create a standardized measurements sheet that is required to be included on clothing sites or tags. Or at least an international standard. It’s done in engineering, why not in textiles?