• fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    3 days ago

    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.

    • Xanza@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      Binary supply-chain attacks are not “minor security issues”.

      Yes they are. The binaries for Ventoy aren’t even updated from release to release. It’s not even evident how old they are. So crying about an attack that only matters if these binaries are bleeding edge is absolutely a minor issue. I don’t even understand how someone of sound mind and body could possibly believe otherwise.

      Not having a security first posture on these kinds of attacks is how the xz event happened

      No one is making the argument that security doesn’t matter. No one is pushing the idea that Ventoy is secure. I’m saying singularly and only that a supply chain attack is just about the dumbest goddamn angle possible to bitch about Ventoy because I could argue that Ventoy would be more vulnerable than it is now to a supply chain attack if the binary blobs are built and updated every time you build a bootable drive. It’s just a truly fucking insane argument that shows a lack of understanding of what a supply chain attack is. The built binaries may be vulnerable and it’s difficult to prove if they are or not, but if you update the binaries all the time they’re more (attack surface is larger) than if they’re only updated when absolutely necessary…

      It’s just plain a poor argument and I’m tired of every armchair expert pretending that its not. People in high security environments aren’t using Ventoy. It’s just such a ridiculous argument.