Live data from Hacker News

Run0, a systemd based alternative to sudo, announced

mastodon.social

131–140 of 902 posts

Re: Run0, a systemd based alternative to sudo, announced

#131
post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I read your OP. It does not contain a technical / security criticism of run0. Yes, I literally say there is nothing wrong with the idea, so you going ahead and demanding I criticize the idea, is just absurd. Really, this is completely bizarre. I even say that the thinking behind replacing sudo is fine, yet you are here complaining that I don't deliver technical arguments against something which I even told you might…

Let me get this right: you see an article on a new thing, which you have no problem with, but have an angry rant in the comments section anyway? And now you're baffled by people's reaction to that? I'm not sure there's much point engaging further, I hope you have a good rest of the day.

No, I think the systemd project shouldn't exist. I have no problem with someone writing a sudo replacement.

Do you understand the difference?

Re: Run0, a systemd based alternative to sudo, announced

#133
post #94

Just a reminder that there are plenty of systemd-less distros available. Also a reminder that those distros would have been safe from the nearly-solar-winds-level backdooring of Linux distros from XZ utils.

That backdoor was never pushed out of the testing branches for distros.

Oh well I guess it didn't matter then.

Re: Run0, a systemd based alternative to sudo, announced

#134
post #75
post #45

systemd has been a net positive for the linux ecosystem. remember when you had to write bash scripts to start, stop, restart services and handle any other signals you want to send it? nowadays it's a unit file (basically just an ini file) away with relatively straightforward API. and you can actually declare startup dependencies and other useful relationships past just "prepend a number signifying when it should run…

I'd agree with your message if systemd was just an init system.

It's not difficult to use some parts of systemd without using others. Is it any different than something like coreutils, another package of linux utilities that are synergistic but usable seperately? Nobody complains about coreutils being bundled. Even the rewrite in rust crowd bundle them.

Re: Run0, a systemd based alternative to sudo, announced

#135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This doesn't answer the question. Also generators are started very early, before other units have been started, so if your system is already running and now you want to generate those units, depending on the state of the other units, they don't really help. >I don't think having an unit that generates units at runtime is an officially supported use case Are you sure? Can you tell me how I would find out?

> This doesn't answer the question. Also generators are started very early, before other units have been started, so if your system is already running and now you want to generate those units, depending on the state of the other units, they don't really help. That's the point. Any situation in which you have a system modify itself at runtime is a recipe for a headache. So you do your auto-generation first, then work…

> Units are just supposed to start a command and little else.

Units are not just for services.

From systemd.unit(5) man page:

> A unit file is a plain text ini-style file that encodes information about a service, a socket, a device, a mount point, an automount point, a swap file or partition, a start-up target, a watched file system path, a timer controlled and supervised by systemd(1), a resource management slice or a group of externally created processes.

Re: Run0, a systemd based alternative to sudo, announced

#136
post #85
post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it? Does systemd's sudo replacement also have a lot of complex code running as root in a suid binary? Because that's what he's complaining about

The complaint might be valid. The solution, to shoehorn yet another functionality on systemd will in no way reduce complexity or attack vectors, merely shift them, again, like with all systemd solutions.

The systemd attack vector is already there, and now the SUID attack vector is removed - sounds like reduction in attack vectors, no?

Re: Run0, a systemd based alternative to sudo, announced

#137
post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> - libsystemd depends on libzlma > - libzlma depends on xz > And therefore, systemd is insecure? Yes. You have literally just described the way it is insecure. It bundles a large amount of functionality under a single system, and therefore anything using that functionality is at risk. You seem to be suggesting that Systemd would be secure if you didn't use it, which is obviously fallacious. Anything is secure if you…

LZMA is a widely used compression protocol. The kernel uses it. xz - the compression tool that was affected gets used by the kernel build makefiles - they reference it in the build docs https://docs.kernel.org/staging/xz.html . It's absolutely fair from systemd to have this dependency and to use the trusted library that the most fundamental part of the underlying OS uses. It was purely the attackers choice to leverag…

Your speculation on what is right and what was fair is of no consequence to me. Their error was not simply using a compression library, it was creating a large central point of failure. If Systemd was smaller, it would not have caused this error. By being large, it made itself vulnerable. It made itself a target. It made other software insecure. These facts are inescapable. And you cannot justify this by simply saying they didn't do anything wrong right before the attack, or that packagers are to blame, or that other software might also be vulnerable, or anything else that doesn't address the core of the issue: Systemd created the circumstances needed for this to happen. They were warned of he risks they created, and chose to do so anyway. Now those risks have been made manifest – the inevitable result of a fundamentally flawed design.

Re: Run0, a systemd based alternative to sudo, announced

#138
post #62
post #45

systemd has been a net positive for the linux ecosystem. remember when you had to write bash scripts to start, stop, restart services and handle any other signals you want to send it? nowadays it's a unit file (basically just an ini file) away with relatively straightforward API. and you can actually declare startup dependencies and other useful relationships past just "prepend a number signifying when it should run…

> you can actually declare startup dependencies and other useful relationships In theory, yes. In practice, I had a lot of trouble ordering things correctly in non-trivial cases. > it's quite annoying that the armchair linux experts complain about how "lol systemd is so stupid for reinventing the wheel, give me my shell scripts back" I can only speak for myself, but I don't want the abysmal sysvinit scripts back. I j…

The other pieces are also pretty excellent. Ifup gave me no joy & was very limited. Systemd-networkd is a wonderful option with vast & great capabilities, that meshes well with the init process & it's style. Systemd-timesyncd is fine, I dunno, works for me. Systemd-journald is probably the weakest of the batch but mostly because it's not very ambitious; I loath that there's no way to really deal with super-active programs hogging all the logspace, short of configuring a second journald instance for that program, which ain't no joy to setup. Systemd-home is a cool set of features for portability. Systemd-nspawn is a bit ahead of its time & looks a little weird now but was a very novel & powerful thing to have built in to most systems. Systemd-resolved is a pretty good local DNS that handles mdns and much weirder cases easily. Systemd-boot is a really nice easy to work with uefi boot loaders that's worlds easier to deal with than uboot or gasp grub.

All of these are taken em or leave em. But they're good expectations to have. I love the bazaar model, but Linux used to have so few common expectations, used to manage various bits so poorly. And now there's a much better base of capabilities, which have universal patterns of management that tend to apply to them (how etc files are laid how, being dbus and maybe varlink accessible). Linux hadn't been growing; when you came to a random systems you expected enormously little and typically got it, and what extras were available were scattered/random and often not particularly high quality or capable software. Systems has extended a much bigger base of competency & capability. That we can plug in a USB drive and systemd-home can create an isolated dynamic user out of that & let that user securely run their environment there is a neat as heck expectation. That our network manager supports setting up such a wide range of bridges and tunnels and taps and tuns is fantastic, is excellent. I don't have words for people turning their noses up at this better world; this is so much more competent & capable a world than where we were, gives us so much we all can now take for granted, and it's been done smartly, more mono-repo than monolithic, such that you can do alternatives. But many of these pieces are utterly without peer. And the consistency of operation you get, the predictability of use, from being under the same umbrella, is an ergonomic wonder that is unmatched.

Re: Run0, a systemd based alternative to sudo, announced

#139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

systemd isn't a single piece of software. It's a collection of software with an unified theme, like KDE or Gnome. Attack surface-wise, I don't think there's much difference between "sudo" being a part of the systemd package and not. Either way there's "sudo" code to be targeted, which package it's part of is just a technicality.

I like to compare Systemd to GNU. Pretty similar scale, similar "take over the world" levels of adoption in Linux (GNU's libc is in nearly everything, all the other GNU tools are ridiculously common), adds lots of attack surface to what used to be single-purpose simple tools, etc. Just about every criticism of Systemd applies just as well to GNU.

Re: Run0, a systemd based alternative to sudo, announced

#140

Why do they have to do this? This is really, really stupid. My issue isn't even that someone tries to replace sudo. That may or may not be a completely fine thing to do, depending on the state of sudo and what improvements can be made. But what makes me really upset is this completely unexplainable need to make everything part of one particular init system. There is absolutely no reason to tie your new sudo replaceme…

> But what makes me really upset is this completely unexplainable need to make everything part of one particular init system. There is absolutely no reason to tie your new sudo replacement to systemd. Absolutely none. The systemd developers are tying it to systemd because they are systemd developers. If somebody else made something like this, it wouldn't be tied to systemd. But somebody else hasn't made something lik…

userv has been around for decades

https://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~ian/userv/

Post reply on HN