PiVPN v4.6.0: The End • Hacker News Board

Re: PiVPN v4.6.0: The End

#81

Post by baq » Sun, Apr 07, 2024, 3:11 PM UTC

solarkraft wrote: post #68

> "But I want and can maintain it, can I take it over?" Let me put it plain and simple: No! I don't know you, I don't trust you! Fork it and carry on! They learned a good lesson from the liblzma situation.

Maybe. ‘Fork it’ means a bad actor can… fork it and advertise as a successor.

Re: PiVPN v4.6.0: The End

#82

Post by junon » Sun, Apr 07, 2024, 3:57 PM UTC

baq wrote: post #81

solarkraft wrote: post #68

> "But I want and can maintain it, can I take it over?" Let me put it plain and simple: No! I don't know you, I don't trust you! Fork it and carry on! They learned a good lesson from the liblzma situation.

Maybe. ‘Fork it’ means a bad actor can… fork it and advertise as a successor.

Then it's up to the consumer to judge that themselves. One component of the liblzma backdoor was that distros were already linking to those tarballs. That wouldn't happen here as the repo will essentially freeze.

Re: PiVPN v4.6.0: The End

#83

Post by nextlevelwizard » Sun, Apr 07, 2024, 4:29 PM UTC

baq wrote: post #81

solarkraft wrote: post #68

> "But I want and can maintain it, can I take it over?" Let me put it plain and simple: No! I don't know you, I don't trust you! Fork it and carry on! They learned a good lesson from the liblzma situation.

Maybe. ‘Fork it’ means a bad actor can… fork it and advertise as a successor.

Better than the alternative