[deleted]
Lennart Poettering, Christian Brauner founded a new company
181–190 of 770 posts
Re: Lennart Poettering, Christian Brauner founded a new company
#182I think https://0pointer.net/blog/authenticated-boot-and-disk-encryp... is a much better explanation of the motivation behind this straight from the horse's mouth. It does a really good job of motivating the need for this in a way that explains why you as the end user would desire such features.
Re: Lennart Poettering, Christian Brauner founded a new company
#183Earlier quoted context omitted.
yeah, the fix for pulseaudio was to throw it away entirely for systemd, I don't think I have a single linux system that boots/reboots reliably 100% of the time these days
The trick is the same: use a popular linux distribution and don't fight the kinks. The people who had no issues with Pulseaudio; used a mainstream distribution. Those distributions did the heavy lifting of making sure stuff fit together in a cohesive way. SystemD is very opinionated, so you'd assume it wouldn't have the same results, but it does.. if you use a popular distro then they've done a lot of the hard work t…
I only use debian
pulseaudio I had to fight every single day, with my "exotic" setup of one set of speakers and a headset
with pipewire, I've never had to even touch it
systemd: yesterday I had a network service on one machine not start up because the IP it was trying to bind to wasn't available yet
the dependencies for the .service file didn't/can't express the networking semantics correctly
this isn't some hacked up .service file I made, it's that from an extremely popular package from a very popular distro
(yeah I know, use a socket activated service......... more tight coupling to the garbage software)
the day before that I had a service fail to start because the wall clock was shifted by systemd-timesyncd during startup, and then the startup timeout fired because the clock advanced more than the timeout
then the week before that I had a load of stuff start before the time was synced, because chrony has some weird interactions with time-sync.target
it's literally a new random problem every other boot because of this non-deterministic startup, which was never a problem with traditional init or /etc/rc
for what? to save maybe a second of boot time
if the distro maintainers don't understand the systemd dependency model after a decade then it's unfit for purpose
Re: Lennart Poettering, Christian Brauner founded a new company
#184This seems like the kind of technology that could make the problem described in https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/can-you-trust.en.html a lot worse. Do you have any plans for making sure it doesn't get used for that?
I'm Aleksa, one of the founding engineers. We will share more about this in the coming months but this is not the direction nor intention of what we are working on. The models we have in mind for attestation are very much based on users having full control of their keys. This is not just a matter of user freedom, in practice being able to do this is far more preferable for enterprises with strict security controls. I…
This is extremely bad logic. The technology of enforcing trusted software is without inherent value good or ill depending entirely on expected usage. Anything that is substantially open will be used according to the values of its users not according to your values so we ought instead to consider their values not yours.
Suppose you wanted to identify potential agitators by scanning all communication for indications in a fascist state one could require this technology in all trusted environments and require such an environment to bank, connect to an ISP, or use Netflix.
One could even imagine a completely benign usage which only identified actual wrong doing alongside another which profiled based almost entirely on anti regime sentiment or reasonable discontent.
The good users would argue that the only problem with the technology is its misuse but without the underlying technology such misuse is impossible.
One can imagine two entirely different parallel universes one in which a few great powers went the wrong way in part enabled by trusted computing and the pervasive surveillance enabled by the capability of AI to do the massive and boring task of analyzing a massive glut of ordinary behaviour and communication + tech and law to ensure said surveillance is carried out.
Even those not misusing the tech may find themselves worse off in such a world.
Why again should we trust this technology just because you are a good person?
Re: Lennart Poettering, Christian Brauner founded a new company
#185So LP is or has left Microsoft ? >We are building cryptographically verifiable integrity into Linux systems I wonder what that means ? It could be a good thing, but I tend to think it could be a privacy nightmare depending on who controls the keys.
Verifiable to who? Some remote third party that isn't me? The hell would I want that?
https://0pointer.net/blog/authenticated-boot-and-disk-encryp...
You. The money quote about the current state of Linux security:
> In fact, right now, your data is probably more secure if stored on current ChromeOS, Android, Windows or MacOS devices, than it is on typical Linux distributions.
Say what you want about systemd the project but they're the only ones moving foundational Linux security forward, no one else even has the ambition to try. The hardening tools they've brought to Linux are so far ahead of everything else it's not even funny.
Re: Lennart Poettering, Christian Brauner founded a new company
#186Remote attestation is another technology that is not inherently restrictive of software freedom. But here are some examples of technologies that have already restricted freedom due to oligopoly combined with network effects: * smartphone device integrity checks (SafetyNet / Play Integrity / Apple DeviceCheck) * HDMI/HDCP * streaming DRM (Widevine / FairPlay) * Secure Boot (vendor-keyed deployments) * printers w/ sign…
> * Secure Boot (vendor-keyed deployments) I wish this myth would die at this point. Secure Boot allows you to enroll your own keys. This is part of the spec, and there are no shipped firmwares that prevents you from going through this process.
What about all those Windows on ARM laptops?
Re: Lennart Poettering, Christian Brauner founded a new company
#187Remote attestation is another technology that is not inherently restrictive of software freedom. But here are some examples of technologies that have already restricted freedom due to oligopoly combined with network effects: * smartphone device integrity checks (SafetyNet / Play Integrity / Apple DeviceCheck) * HDMI/HDCP * streaming DRM (Widevine / FairPlay) * Secure Boot (vendor-keyed deployments) * printers w/ sign…
> * Secure Boot (vendor-keyed deployments) I wish this myth would die at this point. Secure Boot allows you to enroll your own keys. This is part of the spec, and there are no shipped firmwares that prevents you from going through this process.
> This is part of the spec, and there are no shipped firmwares that prevents you from going through this process.
Microsoft required that users be able to enroll their own keys on x86. On ARM, they used to mandate that users could not enroll their own keys. That they later changed this does not erase the past. Also, I've anecdotally heard claims of buggy implementations that do in fact prevent users from changing secure boot settings.
Re: Lennart Poettering, Christian Brauner founded a new company
#188[flagged]
Re: Lennart Poettering, Christian Brauner founded a new company
#189Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Ubuntu Core" is a similar product [1] As I understand it, the main customers for this sort of thing are companies making Tivo-style products - where they want to use Linux in their product, but they want to lock it down so it can't be modified by the device owner. This can be pretty profitable; once your customers have rolled out a fleet of hardware locked down to only run kernels you've signed. [1] https://ubuntu.c…
This sounds like a net negative for the end user
If the end users do not want the net negative, maybe they should pay for the security features instead of expecting everything for free.