[-] hunger@programming.dev 5 points 1 month ago

Not only that: It protects your data. The Unix security model is unfortunately stuck in the 1970s: It protects users from each other. That is a wonderful property, but in todays world you also need to protect the users from the applications they are running: Anything running as your user has access to all your data. And on most computer systems the interesting data is the one the users out there: Cryptogrqphic keys, login information, financial information, ... . Typically users are much more upset to loose their data than about some virus infecting the OS files, those are trivial to fix.

Running anything as anlther user stops that application from having access to most of your data.

[-] hunger@programming.dev 6 points 1 month ago

The same happens with any of the new immutable distributions. It's just less effort as you do not need to do the nix configuration dance anymore.

[-] hunger@programming.dev 4 points 10 months ago

Plugins are a code execution vulnerability by design;-) Especially with binary plugins you can call/access/inspect everything the program itself can. All UI toolkits make heavy use of plugins, so you can not avoid those with almost all UI applications.

There are non-UI applications with similar problems though.

Running anything with network access as root is an extra risk that effects UI and non-UI applications in the same way.

[-] hunger@programming.dev 6 points 11 months ago

Most of your examples are projects started by a company. The very few remaining are those 0.01% that got lucky.

My point stands: When you start an open source project, there is no need to worry about what companies might like or not. You will not get money from anyone.

[-] hunger@programming.dev 4 points 1 year ago

Where are those "many of us"?

It is what the CI uses for testing. If several layers of people decide to not do their job and you have no hardware in your network that announces the DNS servers to use like basically everybody has, then those CI settings might leak through to the occassional user. Even then, at least there is network: Somebody that can't be arsed to configure their network or pick any semi-private distribution will probably prefer that.

Absolutely no issue here, nothing to see.

[-] hunger@programming.dev 5 points 1 year ago

Why? Slab sysv-init (or openrc or s6) and the gnu tools the onto it and you will hardly be able to tell the difference :-)

That is actually the thing I like about systemd: They expose a lot of linux-only features to admins and users, making the kernel shine.

[-] hunger@programming.dev 4 points 1 year ago

Why would he? It never was an issue.

[-] hunger@programming.dev 4 points 1 year ago

You are not done one the config is written: A configuration requires maintenance effort: New plugins get released, others stop getting developed, APIs change. You constantly need to adapt your configuration.

That is why I recommend using a distribution like astonvim. A distribution takes care of keeping the basics going and gives a well msintained base and thus gives you more time to fiddle with the interesting bits of the configuration.

Astronvim in particular is "just" a lazy nvim config and very easy to customize, filtering the standard override process defined by the lazy plugin manager.

I actually got rid of most custom config I had on top of astronvim by using its community repository: It contains easy to add config snippets that fully integrate other plugins with all the plugins in the astronvim config (lsp setup, treesitter, snippets, completion, ...). This ranges from adding one plugin to entire language packs with all the recommended bells and whistles to work with some programming language.

[-] hunger@programming.dev 5 points 1 year ago

Are they embracing activity pub? I read it is just one guy in the community working in it.

And the vast majority of users are on GitHub, looking for code on there. Having activity pub on other forges will not change that big time:-(

[-] hunger@programming.dev 6 points 1 year ago

The basics are all the same:. memory, cpus and caches in between ;-)

But rust does approach many things very differently from C or C++. Learning those new approaches takes time and practice.

[-] hunger@programming.dev 4 points 1 year ago

Yeap, it is always the same set of poorly researched links that get pasted in threads like this.

Unix philosophy, evil corporate interests, insecure, bloated, entangled mess... it is these individuals thatbhave seen the light, notnthe silent majority that does all the work in distributions and when developing software that kind of opted withbtheir feet.

[-] hunger@programming.dev 5 points 1 year ago

I did tick that, since I saw text boxes and went "give me everything" without reading:-)

Fixed. Thank you for pointing this out.

view more: ‹ prev next ›

hunger

joined 1 year ago